Intuition, Emotions, and Decision Making How to improve the quality of your decisions (Full Article) Uri Galimidi, July 12, 2009 How Do We Make Decisions. The commander of the fire fighting brigade did not like what he was seeing. For the past several minutes his men had been fighting the fire in the living room, but the fire would not subside. "Let's get out of here. NOW!" the commander shouted. The men left the house promptly. Two minutes later, the living room floor collapsed into the roaring fire that had been raging in the basement below, of which fire fighters were not aware. It could have ended in disaster. "How did you know?" Gary asked the commander later. "Not sure", said the commander. "Perhaps I have extra-sensory perception". After analyzing many similar situations, Gary concluded that the commander realized that something was amiss with the behavior of this fire, when he subconsciously compared it to the patterns of the countless fires he had previously experienced. (Gary Klein is a psychologist specializing in the science of decision making. His book is titled The Power Of Intuition, Random House, 2004.) The Three Circuits of Decision Making. The study of the neuroscience of decision making has evolved considerably in the past 15 year. Using Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI), which measures the oxygen and glucose flow in the brain, and Positron Emission Tomography (PET), researchers are now able to study the brain's circuits that activate in a variety of decision making situations. Researchers such as Antonio Damasio, Antoine Bechara, and Gary Klein have helped us understand the three brain processes that are chiefly involved in decision making, sometimes through productive collaboration, and sometimes through troubling competition between them. These three processes are: Intuition. Intuition is the subconscious and instantaneous process of interpreting the situation at hand, by taking in all sensory signals representing the situation, and then comparing the holistic picture to our knowledge and memories of similar situations stored deep in the memory circuits of our brain. Emotions. Scientists define our four prime emotions as being Fear, Anger, Sadness, and Joy. Some scientists add Disgust and Surprise to the top four. Others define Motivation as a force akin to emotions. With the aid of modern technology (such as fMRI and PET) scientists have been able to demonstrate the powerful influence of our subconscious and conscious emotions on our decisions and actions. Cognition. Often called the executive center of our brain, the Prefrontal Cortex (at the front of the frontal lobes), is the area of our brain that integrates the inputs from all other areas, and executes functions such as long term planning, reasoning, judgment, and decision making. Understanding the role that emotion and intuition play in our decisions, and how these processes occur in our brains, may help us to learn how to harness and align them, leading to better decisions. The Power Of Intuition. The Oxford Dictionary defines intuition as "immediate insight or understanding without conscious reasoning". But how does intuition relate to management decision making? Gary Klein defines intuition as "the way we translate our experiences into judgments and decisions". So let's examine further the concept of intuition. 1.     The initial interpretation of a pattern or situation is typically subconscious. In their seminal research, Antoine Bechara and his colleagues proved in 2005 that the subjects in their study were able to subconsciously recognize a repetitive pattern in a deck of cards, long before they were able to act on it, let alone articulate it. In their famous Iowa Gambling Task, Bechara and his colleagues gave participants four decks of cards: two blue decks with higher scoring cards, and two red decks with lower scoring cards. The object of the task was to accumulate as many points as possible. Participants were told that one of the two colors yielded higher scores, but were not told which one. Time after time Bechara's team found that most participants began to sweat in the palm of their hands when reaching for the red deck, just ten cards into the game. After about 50 cards, participants began to act on their hunch and avoid the red decks. But only after about 80 cards, were they able to articulate what was wrong with the red decks. This study led us to conclude that the initial interpretation of a pattern or situation typically occurs subconsciously, long before we are able to articulate it or act on it. This conclusion was substantiated time and again by Gary Klein in his research on intuition. 2.     The story of Getty's Kouros. In his book Blink (Little, Brown and Company, 2005) Malcolm Gladwell recounts the story of the ancient Greek Kouros marble statue purchased by the Getty museum for $10 million. The statute was offered to the Getty in September of 1983 by an art dealer named Giafranco Becchina. Before signing the deal the Getty brought in a geologist from the University of California named Stanley Margolis to examine the statue. After two days of detailed examination Margolis concluded that the calcite layer covering the statute's dolomite marble could form over hundreds if not thousands of years, hence validating the authenticity of the statue. In addition, lawyers representing the Getty poured over the pile of documents presented by Becchina, and could not find anything wrong. So three years later the statue went on display at the Getty. And yet, one of the Getty's board members, Italian art historian Federico Zeri was not happy. He could not explain why, but was sure that something was amiss with the statute. Zeri was soon joined by two other experts named Evelyn Harrison and Thomas Hoving who took one quick look at the statute and stated it was a fake, but could not explain why. The Getty was getting worried, so they took the statute to Athens, Greek and convened a symposium on the Kouros. Experts were brought in to take a look at the Kouros, and they all expressed an "intuitive repulsion". Who was right, asked Malcom Gladwell in his book: The Getty lawyers and scientists, or the intuitive art experts? The Getty held on to the Kouros. But with the passage of time the authenticity of the statute began to fall apart. For example, says Gladwell, one of the letters presented by Bacchina was dated 1952, but had a postal code that did not exist until twenty years later. Another letter dated 1955 referred to a bank account that was opened eight years later. So what can we learn from this story? All the art experts reacted in the same manner. They took one quick look at the statute, absorbed the entire image and then subconsciously compared it to the countless images of Greek statutes they have seen in their professional lives. Although they found it difficult to decompose the elements of the Getty Kouros that did not match the patterns stored in their memory circuits, the overall picture was clear to them. They were able to prove the triumph of intuition over science. 3.     Intuitive interpretations are not always correct. It was early Sunday morning and I was on my usual morning run. As I was approaching the bus station I saw an old man walking by, leaning on his cane. Then, unexpectedly the old man lifted his cane and waved it in the air. Strange as it was, my instantaneous interpretation of his action was that he was waving a bus to stop at the bus stop. It took me a couple of seconds to realize that there were no buses this early on Sunday morning, and a couple more seconds to recognize that the old man was actually greeting me with his cane. "Good morning" I replied as I past him by. A minute or two later, what transpired became clear to me. So often when I run past our bus stops, I see older people in our neighborhood waving the buses to stop. Over time this pattern of behavior sank into my memory. So when I saw the old man waving, my brain registered the picture and subconsciously compared it with the patterns stored deep in my memory system. The correct interpretation of my cognitive system came much later. To me this was an anecdotal proof that in some situations our subconscious intuitive processes may produce a mismatch between the situation we are observing and the patterns that are stored in our brain's memory circuits. In their Harvard Business Review (HBR) article (February 2009) Andrew Campbell and his colleagues recount the critical decision made by Brigadier General Matthew Broderick on August 29, 2005. Brigadier Broderick was the man in charge of the Homeland Security Operations Center during Hurricane Katrina. On that Monday evening, before going home, Broderick had to prepare an assessment report for his superiors at the Whitehouse. By that time Broderick had received 17 reports of major flooding and levee breaches. He also received some reports from Bourbon Street, where people had been celebrating their escape from the devastating hurricane. Based on his past experience with several lower category hurricanes, Broderick decided to discount the reports of levee breaches, and assume that they would turn out to be an exaggeration, like it happened several times before. He did not want to be viewed as an alarmist by his superiors. So before going home that evening, Broderick issued a report stating that the levees seem to be holding. Clearly, when our intuition is based on experiences with situations that are different from the situation at hand, our decisions may turn to be grossly misguided. 4. When does intuition work Best? Beth Crandall, vice president of research at Klein Associates, focused her research on 19 nurses in the neonatal ward at the Miami Valley Hospital in Dayton, Ohio (Bill Breen, fastcompany.com, December 2007). ‘How did you know that this baby needed immediate care?" Crandall asked the nurses. "Did the medical charts indicate that something was wrong?" "No" said the nurses. "The charts were all good. We just knew" was the consistent answer she had received. While probing a little deeper, Crandall realized that the nurses were relying on their intuition. Crandall then set to work with the nurses to produce a comprehensive list of visual cues they used to tell that a baby is in distress. When she compared these cues to the medical literature, Crandall discovered that most of them were not mentioned at all. It was the collective experience of many hours, days, and years of watching the babies in the ward, that led to the development of a deeply routed body of knowledge, which the nurses used to recognize the distressed babies. So when does intuition work best? It works best when we have accumulated in our memory circuits a data base of situations similar to the one being encountered. A grayish green baby skin complexion means the baby is sick, a fire in the living room typically responds in this particular way to water from the hose, an authentic Greek Kouros has a particular appearance. Intuition does not work well when the data base of memorized situations does not correspond to the situation at hand, or when the experience data base is relatively thin. In his book The Power Of Intuition, Gary Klein states that intuition is difficult to apply in situations that have many complex and/or unrelated variables. The stock market is an example of such a complex environment in which intuition rarely works. Emotions - The formidable driving force Emotions. We cannot make decisions without them, yet overly intense emotions will lead us to misguided decisions or outright disastrous ones. Here is a brief summary of what we know thus far about the role of emotions in decision making: 1.     Without emotional input our ability to make decisions is severely impaired. Consider the case of Elliot, a patient of the renowned neuroscientist Antonio Damasio. Elliot was a successful businessman, a good husband and father. Unfortunately, Elliot developed a major, orange-size tumor in his brain. Soon after the tumor had been surgically removed, Elliot started to demonstrate strange behaviors. Confronted with even the most trivial of decisions, Elliot would endlessly deliberate the pro's and con's of each alternative, unable to decide which course of action he should take. In effect, Elliot could no longer reach even the most mundane of decisions. Elliot's brain scans revealed damage to his ventromedial prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain that integrates signals from our emotion circuits into the cognitive circuits of our brain. After studying many more patients with damage to their emotion circuits, Damasio concluded that without input from our emotion system (the limbic system), our ability to make decisions is severly impaired. In other words, the notion that purely cool-headed deliberation will always lead us to a better decision was firmly dispelled by Damasio and his colleagues. 2.     Our brain's desire for reward is the principal driver of bad judgment. Hans Breiter a neuroscientist at Massachusetts General Hospital, was among the first to use fMRI to explore the brain's reward system (Gardiner Morse, HBR January 2006). Breiter was able to show that the areas of the brain the respond to drugs, also respond to other emotions such as the anticipation of receiving money. Surprisingly, Breiter was also able to show that the rewards brain's circuits respond as much to the prospect of receiving money, as to actually receiving it. The reward circuit in our brain is regulated by a number of neurotransmitters, chief among them is the neurotransmitter dopamine. Researchers have shown that the higher the level of dopamine in the brain, the higher our desire for rewards. At the age of 41 Bruce, a computer programmer, had developed Parkinson's disease. Within a few months Bruce also started to display a compulsive appetite for gambling, buying things he did not need, and excessively demanding sex from his wife. Shortly thereafter, Bruce went to his doctor to express his concern over this newly acquired behavior. At that time Bruce had been taking a medication called Pramipexole, a dopamine-like chemical, to regulate the tremors of his Parkinson condition. Upon hearing about Bruce's compulsive behavior, the doctor advised Bruce to reduce the dose of Pramipexole. Within days Bruce's compulsive behavior vanished. Clearly, a well regulated reward system is essential for our survival and development. But once the system gets out of balance, it can lead us to disastrous decisions and actions. 3.     Many of our emotional processes occur subconsciously. In his book A User's Guide To The Brain (Pantheon Books, 2001), John Ratey explains that there are two paths for transmitting emotional signals in the brain. The first is a very fast path that transmits sensory signals through the Thalamus directly to the emotions system (the limbic system), which then activates bodily responses to these signals. A second path is a slower route that takes the signals to the frontal cortex for contextual assessment, and only then is the signal sent to the emotions system. So for example, if you see something that looks like a snake lying in the dark corner of your garage, your immediately response would be to run out of the garage as fast as you can. It would then take you a couple of seconds to realize that what looked like a snake is actually an old piece of black rubber hose. Thank goodness for our contextual assessment, even though it was late in coming. The trouble is that many of our emotional forces remain at the subconscious level, driving us to decisions and actions without affording us the benefits of a rational contextual assessment. 4.     Emotional Hijack. Take for example the story of Dr. Clara Harris, recounted in Gardiner Morse's excellent article Decisions and Desire (HBR, January 2006). You may remember Harris as the Houston dentist who ran her husband down with her Mercedes in a hotel parking lot. She did so upon learning that he was having an affair with his secretary. "What were you thinking?" asked her attorney. "I wasn't thinking anything" said Harris, in her testimony. Clara Harris was convicted in 2003 for the murder of her husband. Clara Harris' case is a demonstration of the extreme influence of emotions over our decisions and actions. Daniel Goleman (Emotional Intelligence, Bantam Books, 2006) calls it "emotional hijacking", whereby the intensity of the activity in the emotional circuit of our brain overwhelms and virtually shuts down the cognitive functions of our brain. Of course Harris' case is an exception, but it serves to explain the many situations in which we say or do things which we later regret, once we had a chance to apply our rational cognitive thoughts. 5.     Fear - our strongest emotion. The ability of researchers to identify the areas of the brain that correspond to certain emotions is remarkable. With the aid of fMRI researchers have been able to identify the brain circuits the light up when we experience fear. Our ability to understand fear may help us manage it better in decision making situation. The amygdala is the area in our brain that is mostly associated with our emotions in general, and fear in particular. The amygdala is a small almond-shaped structure deep near the base of our brain that is responsible for sending instantaneous signals in response to perceived threats. The amygdala is also responsible for attaching "emotional tags" to our learned experiences. So when our memories are recalled at a later time, the emotional tags are recalled with them. This is how we learn to fear certain situations, while others are remembered with joy, sadness, or anger. Interestingly, the stronger the emotional impact of the original experience, the stronger our recollection of the event and the details surrounding it.  Consider for example, the executive who had a very frightening experience when he worked as a young summer intern at a steel mill. Years later he was presented with an investment opportunity at another steel mill. Even though it was a good investment by all accounts, the executive rejected it. When asked why he did so, he could not explain. "I don't know", he said. "I just had a very bad feeling about it". 6.     Avoiding the pain of loosing. In an fMRI study using an investment game, Camelia Kuhnen and Brian Knutson of Stanford University, found that after experiencing a loss when investing in certain stocks, the players would pick a riskless low return bond, even when they had a strong sense of which stocks were bound to yield a handsome profit. Once again the emotional tag of anxiety attached to the previous loss, influenced the decision of the players. Kuhnen and Knutson were able to show that an area of the brain called the anterior insula would activate in anticipation of the loss. The signal produced by the anterior insula was driving the player to make a sub-optimal investment decision. This study brings yet another illustration of the subconscious power of our emotions over our rational thinking processes. 7.     Anger and revenge. The influence of anger or revenge on our decision making provides an interesting example of the triumph of emotions over reason. Alan Sanfey, a researcher at the University of Arizona used fMRI to scan the brains of subjects who played a card game known as the Ultimatum Game. Sanfey and his colleagues found that players were willing to forego profitable moves in their game, in order to punish other players whom they perceived as displaying unfair behavior towards them. 8. Disgust and dislike. Disgust and dislike are two related emotions that may lead us to making irrational decisions. Take for example the continuous rejection by Yahoo founder and former CEO Jerry Yang, of the $45 billion offer by Microsoft's CEO Steve Ballmer to buy Yahoo. Clearly a decision of this nature involves very complex rational considerations on both sides. But were there any emotions involved? The New York Post reported on February 19, 2008: According to one source close to the situation, "The emotional part of Yang would rather do anything but sell to Microsoft". At the time the market value of Yahoo was $39 billion. Today it is $22 billion. The impact of Yang's decision on Yahoo's shareholders was enormous. Jerry Yang resigned as chief of Yahoo on November 18, 2008. 9.     Greed. Although you may be able to think about many current examples of the disastrous outcomes of greed, I prefer to take you a few years back to the early 1990's. Remember the story of Nick Leeson, the twenty-something year old trader who single handedly brought down the UK-based Baring Securities? For three years (from 1992 to 1995) Leeson, who was stationed in the bank's Singapore office, had been gambling with the bank's investment in futures, until he accumulated a loss of $1 billion. Driven by greed and fear, Leeson had been continuously hiding his losses, hoping to recover in his next trade. In 1995 Leeson brought Baring Securities to bankruptcy. 10. Pursuit versus Outcome. Brian Knutson of Stanford University conducted an interesting study. Using fMRI, Knutson showed that when being offered the prospect of receiving money, a component of the emotion system (the nucleus accumbens) was showing increased activity. Further, Knutson showed that the higher the sum of money offered, the higher the level of activity in the nucleus accumbens. However, when the subjects actually received the money, there was not activity in the accumbens. Knutsen concluded that it was the anticipation that produced the emotional drive, rather than the outcome itself. Can you think of the implications of Knutson's conclusions on the process of decision making? The premise of this article is that by building our awareness of the processes by which our emotions affect our decisions and our actions, we can better understand the pitfalls of our decision making processes, and develop ways to avoid them, thereby leading to better decisions. The Pitfalls of Decision Making. In their HBR article (February 2009) Andrew Campbell and his colleagues, describe their research into 83 high profile executive decisions, which were flawed at the time they were made, resulting in disastrous outcomes. At the University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School of Business, Stephen Hoch and Howard Kunreuther, conducted similar work on the factors that influence individuals and groups in their decision making. Having further reviewed the literature on decision making, I can offer the following summary of the pitfalls inherent in the process: Erroneous Intuitive Response. The first pitfall is when we intuitively and subconsciously draw on irrelevant past experiences, believing that they are similar to the situation at hand, and may therefore be used as a valid reference. Overpowering Emotional Influence. The most powerful influence over our decisions is that of our emotions. The trouble is that they often act subconsciously, without us being aware of their intervention. The pitfall occurs when these powerful emotions drive us to decisions which are completely at odds with our core values or with the rational criteria we have established to guide our decisions. Rationalizing Irrational Assumptions. So powerful is the influence of our emotions that we sometimes tend to rationalize totally unfounded assumptions, in order to trick our rational brain into supporting the decisions that our emotions drive us to make. Avoiding The Pitfalls. Whether it is a career decision, a family decision, or a business decision, there are clearly certain decisions that merit a much more rigorous process to help you avoid the pitfalls of a misguided decision. If you are facing such a decision, consider the approach outlined below. Some Prep Work First. Before you start assessing your decision, take a step back and write down the foundations for your decision. Remember: writing will help you structure your thoughts, and will make you more aware of non-cognitive intuitive and emotional elements that may influence your decision. First write down the objectives of your decision and the rationale for your decision, i.e. why do you have to make this decision. Next write your vision of the end state of your decision, once the outcome has been fully attained. Additionally, write your core values and the criteria that will guide you in making your decision. You core values could include: integrity, hard work, family, etc. You criteria should be specific to your decision and could include factors such as quality of life for your family, a satisfying career with growth opportunities, and of course financial criteria. In Tune With Your Intuition. As Gary Klein states in his book The Power Of Intuition (2004), the first question to ask is "what is going on", rather than "what should I do". The purpose of this step is to assess the nature of the situation at hand, and whether the decision you are about to make is guided by past experiences which are similar to the current situation. If the situation has many complex unrelated variables, with random or unpredictable behaviors, you should treat your intuition with circumspect and supplement it with further research and analysis. Also, carefully review your past experiences that may intuitively influence your decision. Write down the conditions that existed at the time and the outcome of each past experience. If the situation that existed then is fundamentally different from the circumstances of your current decision, you may wish to discount the impact of those past experiences on your decision. For example, if your intuition is telling you to launch a new product line based on your successful experiences with past launches, yet the new product is in a field in which you have no expertise, your intuition may be based on irrelevant experiences. Take Stock of Your Emotions. As mentioned, very often the emotions that guide our decisions powerfully overwhelm our cognitive rational thinking. What's more they do so subconsciously, without us being aware of what is taking place. The purpose of this step is to ensure that the emotions driving your decision are consistent with your core values, and with the rational criteria you are using to evaluate your decision. The emotions you are experiencing may include fear, desire for reward, greed, attraction to someone else, anger, or revenge. Consciously scan your emotions and write down each emotion that may be influencing your decision. Then ask yourself how consistent each emotion is with your core values and with the rational criteria you established. If you find major inconsistencies between your emotions and your core values or guiding principles, you need to reassess your decision. For example, consider Brian's decision to invest in a new business idea. Brian had a very strong desire to succeed, particularly because his last two business ventured failed, and he desperately wanted to show his family and friends that he can be successful again. Even though Brian had done some research in the area, there were still too many unknowns, and the risk associated with his new business idea was high. When going through the Emotional Stock exercise, Brian wrote down his core values, one of which was the well being and financial security of his family. After re-assessing the financial consequences of a possible failure of his new business, Brian had to admit to himself, that despite his very strong desire for success, he could not undertake this business venture on his own because of its high financial risk. Upon further consideration, Brain decided to look for a financial partner for his new business. Have You Asked Enough Questions? The last step in this self-assessment is to examine the key assumptions upon which you based your decision. The key question to ask here is: "have I fallen pray to my emotions and accepted loosely argued assumptions as a virtual certainty?" So often we desperately want to believe our assumptions so as to make our desired outcome cognitively rational. Take for example, the assumption made recently by many property investors and home buyers that home prices will continue to appreciate, and that they will be able to refinance their mortgages at low rates. So strong was their emotional drive that they were not even willing to consider an alternative scenario. Carefully review your assumptions and the data upon which they are based. Ask yourself how comfortable you are that you have done sufficient research to substantiate your assumptions. Also ask yourself if you have sufficiently considered alternative outcomes pertaining to your assumptions. If you are not comfortable with the results of this assessment go back to the drawing board, gather more data, do more research, and consider the alternative outcomes, until you are comfortable with your assumptions. Invite An Outside Intervention. If at the end of this assessment, you are still not comfortable with your decision, it may be time to invite an outside intervention. It may be a coach, a consultant, and accountant, or a financial advisor. A competent and experienced outsider can help you address the imbalances in your decision making process. A coach will help you articulate the core values and the criteria that should be guiding you, understand the emotions that are driving you, ask you insightful questions, and perhaps help you see things differently and more clearly. A consultant will help you in further researching the factors affecting your decision, and better assessing the risks and rewards. A proficient facilitator will guide you and your team through a structured deliberation of the decision ahead, and will ensure that the group dynamics is well balanced. Decision Making Training. If you and your organization have to make critical decisions frequently, you may wish to consider taking further training in effective decision making. This type of training will equip you with the tools and techniques that will help you avoid the pitfalls outlines in this article, and improve the quality of your decisions. Armed with this approach you are bound to ensure that the wisdom of your intuition and the power of your emotions will serve to positively guide and reinforce your decisions. Copyright © 2009 The Will To Change Inc. For further enquiry e-mail uri@thewilltochange.com or visit http://www.thewilltochange.com/ References: Adams, C. M., Fong, G. W., Hommer, D. and Knutson, B. Anticipation of Increasing Monetary Reward Selectively Recruits Nucleus Accumbens. The Journal of Neuroscience, 2001, Vol. 21 RC159 1 of 5 Aronson, J. A., Cohen, J. D., Nystrom, L. E., Rilling J. K., and Sanfey A. G. (2003). The neural basis of economic decision-making in the ultimatum game. Science.  300.5626 (June 13, 2003): 1755(4). Ballard, K., and Knutson, B. (2009). Dissociable neural representations of future reward magnitude and delay during temporal discounting NeuroImage 45 (2009) 143-150. Bechara. A., Damasio, A. R., Damasio, H., and Tranel D. (2005). The Iowa Gambling Task and the somatic marker hypothesis: some questions and answers. Trends in Cognitive Sciences Vol.9 No.4 April 2005. Campbell, A., Finkelstein, S., and Whitehead, J. (2009). Why Good Managers Make Bad Decisions. Harvard Business Review. February 2009. Clark, L., Lawrence, A. J., Astley-Jones F., and Gray N. (2008). Gambling Near-Misses Enhance Motivation to Gamble and Recruit Win-Related Brain Circuitry. DOI 10.1016/j.neuron.2008.12.031 Clavien, C, and Klein, R. Eager for Fairness or for Revenge? Altruism and Emotion in Neuroeconomics. Southern Society for Philosophy and Psychology, 101st Annual Meeting (Savannah, GA April 9-11). Cooper, J. C., Knutson, B. & (2006). The lure of the unknown. Neuron, 51, 280-282. pdf Damasio, A. (1994). Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. Putnam Publishing, 1994, hardcover: ISBN 0-399-13894-3 de Quervain, D. J., Fischbacher, J., Treyer U., Schellhammer V., Schnyder M., Buck U., Fred, A., and Fehr, E. (2004), "The Neural Basis of Altruistic Punishment", Science, 305, pp. 1254-58. Fox, C. R., Poldrack, R. A. Tom, S. M., and Trepel C. (2007). The Neural Basis of Loss Aversion in Decision-Making Under Risk. Science 26 January 2007: Vol. 315. no. 5811, pp. 515 - 518. Greer, S. M., Knutson, B., (2008). Anticipatory affect: Neural correlates and consequences for choice. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 363, 3771-3786. Glover, G., Kaufman, M., Knutson, B., Peterson, R., and Taylor, J. (2005). Distributed Neural Representation of Expected Value. The Journal of Neuroscience, May 11, 2005,  25(19):4806-4812 Hoch, S., and Kunreuther, H. (2001). How Bad Decisions Can Lead to Billion-Dollar Mistakes.  Knowledge@Wharton February 2001. Holden, C. (2001) 'Behavioral' Addictions: Do they exist? Science, 294, 980-982; Kahneman, D., Tversky, A. (1981). The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice Science, New Series, Vol. 211, No. 4481. (Jan. 30, 1981), pp. 453-458. Klein, G. (2004). The Power Of Intuition. Random House, 2004. Knutson, B., Kuhnen, C. M., Wimmer, G. E., and Winkielman, P. (2008). Nucleus accumbens activation mediates the influence of reward cues on financial risk taking. NeuroReport, 19, 509-513. Knutson, B., Kuhnen C. M. (2005). Eager for Fairness or for Revenge? Altruism and Emotion in Neuroeconomics.  Neuron, Vol. 47, pp. 763-770, September 1, 2005 Knutson, B., Kuhnen C. M.  The Neural Basis of Financial Risk Taking. Neuron, Vol. 47, 763-770, September 1, 2005, Malenka, R. C., and Nesler, E. J. (2004). The Addicted Brain. Scientific American. pp. 78-85. March 2004. Morse, G. (2006) Decisions and Desire. Harvard Business Review. January, 2006. Winkielman, P., Knutson, B., Paulus, M., Trujillo, J. L. (2007). Affective influence on judgments and decisions: Moving towards core mechanisms. Review of General Psychology, 11, 179-192.