Psychoengineering: Difference between revisions

From psychoengineering
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Content added Content deleted
Line 66: Line 66:


subgraph cognitive
subgraph cognitive
⚫
emotionalstate
perspective
perspective
⚫
emotionalstate
end
end

classDef padded padding-right:7.5em;
class cognitive padded
class physical padded


|
|

Revision as of 05:10, 10 March 2024

Psychoengineering is a research-based engineering practice designed to control and mitigate mental disorders such as depression and anxiety. This site serves as a guide to psychoengineering and how to perform it.

Humans have two primary systems of acquiring knowledge: intuition, a fast and unconscious reflex; and logic, a slow and deliberate process.[1] Each of these dual cognitive methods is designed to interface with a specific type of information,[2] and are thus connected to different parts of the brain. The neural circuitry of intuition (the amygdala, basal ganglia and lateral temporal cortex)[3] is linked to circuitry related to working memory, motor control, attention, perception, and empathy.[4][5][6] Meanwhile, the neural circuitry of reason (anterior cingulate cortex, prefrontal cortex, and the medial temporal lobe including the hippocampus)[7] is linked to circuitry related to long-term memory recall, executive function, and complex decision-making.[8][9]

These systems are implicated in different behaviors, but like everything in the brain they are deeply connected and regularly interface with each other. For example, one could notice a dessert table and be drawn to it by their intuitive, perceptual mind - but ultimately be drawn away from it by their logical mind.[10][a]

Intuitive mind Logical mind
  • Fast and parallel
  • High error rate
  • Useful in persuasion, detecting deception
  • Useful for perceptual, physical knowledge
  • Automatically driven by similarity and association
  • Prone to judgements
  • Slow and sequential
  • Relatively low error rate
  • Impossible to construct morality with alone
  • Useful for complex decision-making
  • Deliberately driven by structured, relational data
  • Tends to disregard emotions

This dialectic was first hypothesized by ancient philosophers, who developed practices to synthesize the two minds. These practices, refined by neuropsychology, form the basis of the techniques used in dialectical behavioral therapy (DBT)[13]. The goal is to achieve the synthetic mind:

Synthetic mind
Emotional intelligence
  • Can discern and label internal emotional state (beyond "bad")
  • Understands how emotions (current and future) can affect decision-making abilities
  • Validating others and self
Acceptance
  • Capable of cognitive defusion
  • Understanding that the current moment in time cannot be changed, only the future can be changed
  • Understanding that pain is inevitable but suffering is optional[14]

Obstacles to achieving synthetic mind

Notes

  1. ^ Psychoengineering uses "intuitive/logical mind" for these systems, but they have many different names in contemporary psychology. Stanovich uses "systems 1/2", so as to not give a preference to either system. Evans has used "old/new mind", in reference to the evolutionary age of each system.[11] Darlow and Sloman use "intuitive/deliberate system" to emphasize the level of conscious control present in each.[12]

Citations

  1. ^ Kahneman 2011, pp. 20–23
  2. ^ Darlow & Sloman 2010, pp. 1–3
  3. ^ Lieberman 2003, p. 7
  4. ^ Ramezanpour & Fallah 2022
  5. ^ Roozendaal & et al. 2009
  6. ^ Schacter & et al. 2020
  7. ^ Lieberman 2003, p. 10
  8. ^ Aharoni & et al. 2013
  9. ^ Friedman & Robbins 2021
  10. ^ Darlow & Sloman 2010, p. 1
  11. ^ Evans & Stanovich 2013, p. 1
  12. ^ Darlow & Sloman 2010, p. 2
  13. ^ Linehan & Dimeff 2001, p. 1
  14. ^ Alschuler et al. 2020

References

  • Aharoni, Eyal; Vincent, Gina M.; Harenski, Carla L.; Calhoun, Vince D.; Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter; Gazzaniga, Michael S.; Kiehl, Kent A. (2013). "Neuroprediction of future rearrest". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 110 (15): 6223–6228. doi:10.1073/pnas.1219302110.
  • Darlow, Adam L.; Sloman, Steven A. (7 April 2010). "Two systems of reasoning: architecture and relation to emotion". Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science. 1 (3): 382–392. doi:10.1002/wcs.34.
  • Evans, Jonathan St. B. T.; Stanovich, Keith E. (2013). "Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition". Perspectives on Psychological Science. 8 (3): 223–241. doi:10.1177/1745691612460685.
  • Friedman, Naomi P.; Robbins, Trevor W. (2021). "The role of prefrontal cortex in cognitive control and executive function". Neuropsychopharmacology. 47 (47): 1–18. doi:10.1038/s41386-021-01132-0.
  • Kahneman, Daniel (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow (1 ed.). New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. ISBN 978-0-3742-7563-1.
  • Lieberman, Matthew. D. (2003). "Reflexive and reflective judgment processes: A social cognitive neuroscience approach". In Forgas, Joeseph. P.; Williams, Kipling. D.; von Hippel, William (eds.). Social judgments: Implicit and explicit processes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 44–67. ISBN 9780521822480.
  • Linehan, Marsha M.; Dimeff, Linda (2001). "Dialectical Behavior Therapy in a nutshell" (PDF). The California Psychologist. 34: 10–13.
  • Ramezanpour, Hamidreza; Fallah, Mazyar (12 April 2022). "The role of temporal cortex in the control of attention". Current Research in Neurobiology. 3 (100038). doi:10.1016/j.crneur.2022.100038.
  • Roozendaal, Benno; McEwen, Bruce S.; Chattarji, Sumantra (13 May 2009). "Stress, memory and the amygdala". Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 10 (June 2009): 423–433. doi:10.1038/nrn2651.
  • Schacter, Daniel L.; Gilbert, Daniel Todd; Nock, Matthew K.; Wegner, Daniel M. (2019). Psychology (5th ed.). Worth Publishers, Macmillan Learning. ISBN 9781319190804.


Retrieved from "https://psycho.engineering/wiki/Psychoengineering?oldid=3743"