The potential anomalous component of Intuition

1. The potential anomalous component of Intuition Empirical evidence and an integrated theoretical approach Dick J. Bierman, University of Amsterdam

2. Outline • 1: Qualitative Model of Intuition • Damasio’s gambling experiment • 2:Integrated model • Damasio re-analyzed: presentiment? • 3:Violation of causality • Could account for all psi-phenomena • 4: Accomodation in Physics • Time Symmetry allowed • The Necker Cube experiment • 5: Individual differences • Brain coherence • The fmri meditation experiment on presentiment

3. Part I • A qualitative model of intuition

4. Current problem Good or Bad move Damasio’s Somatic Marker model PAST (impl. learning) PRESENT (biased selection) Previous problems (selection of move) Actual decision NC Reduction of Alternatives Somatic Marking Of Decision

5. Test of SM model (signs of implicit learning, and signs of somatic marker) • IOWA Gambling task. Take a card from one of 4 decks. Cards can be losing or winning (the amount of $$ you win or loose is on the other side of the card).

6. Draws card Feedback: win or loss Damasio’s IOWA gambling procedure Participants (patients & controls) get initially $2000 Two are bad decks (loose in the long run). Skin Conductance is recorded and later averaged Preparation SkinConductance time

7. Results Gambling experiment • Implicit learning • Normal subjects take more often from good decks while thinking they are just guessing, they learn the good decks but are not conscious of their learning. • Somatic Marker • Before these subjects explicitly formulate the difference between the decks of cards, their body already ‘knows’. This is indicated by larger skin conductance before taking from a bad deck. • Patients don’t learn and don’t show a somatic marker. • There is criticism on the experiments and the interpretation.

8. Part II • Integration of anomalous componentof intuition

9. Causal model PAST (impl. learning) PRESENT (biased selection) Previous problem and decision (selection of alternative) Current similar problem Actual decision Good or Bad outcome NC Reduction of Alternatives Somatic Marking Of Decision

10. Future outcome Past outcomes Integrated model:Driven by the future outcome PRESENT FUTURE PAST Actual decision Physiological Response Somatic Marker ???????? Presentiment

11. Pre-sentiment in IOWA Gambling task? How do we measure presentiment: • Future random event (e.g. outcome of decision) • Two potential outcomes • One good, one bad There are winning and loosing cards in all the decks! So: Do not average SC over bad and good decks but over the winning and loosing cards within the decks! SAME RAW DATA

12. Drawscard Feedback: win or loss Skin Conductance in gambling tasksplit for Winning & Loosing cards Response larger for loss Arousal in past is also larger for future loss! Preparation Loss Win time

13. CARD!-analysis Damasio’s Gambling experiment • t = 1.634; df=117 ; p =0.053 • • Presentiment effect : 20% of normal effect!

14. Part III • All paranormal phenomena can be explained • Telepathy • Clairvoyance • Precognition • Psychokinesis

15. Part IV • Can Physics accommodate time running backwards

16. Time’s arrow in physics: the facts • In nearly all physical formalisms: time-symmetry - Most notably in Electro Magnetic theory: • Retarded and Advanced solution • Is generally considered a quirk of the mathematics (notable exceptions: Feynman, Wheeler,Cramer)

17. Time’s arrow in physics: the hypothesis Advanced solutions do not occur in simple physical systems due to boundary conditions. Processing of information by a complex physical system like the brain supporting consciousness creates totally different boundary conditions under which the ‘advanced solution’ may occur (CIRTS) Added postulate: Coherence of brain state is essential.

18. Coherence crucial • Coherence is a crucial factor in the boundary considerations • Feynman & Wheeler (1945) • Conscious visual experience: Binding problem -> coherence

19. The role of Emotions In a fundamental physical framework emotions do not play a role therefore: Advanced solutions should not only occur with emotions Emotions may play an indirect role through influence in coherence brain state & through stronger effects in future. Do we see anomalous advanced effects with non emotional tasks?

20. Necker Cube Opaque top view

21. Necker Cube Transparent Bi stable views

22. The Necker Cube experiment 2 future conditions Top view is experienced Change into opaque Top or Bottom view Top view duration time First button press Second button press

23. Results Necker Cube exp. Pilot + Amsterdam + Groningen: 129 millisec difference (t=1.97, N=153, p =0.026) • Conclusion: • ‘Retroactive’ interference • Emotions are not required • Effect size is between 5 - 10%

24. Part V • Individual Differences • Coherence is the only parameter in the model

25. Meditators vs Controls The effect of meditation experience on presentiment (fMRI study) Standard Presentiment paradigm emotional vs neutral pictures

26. Meditators vs Controls Results: More presentiment in meditators during (10) and outside of meditation (13.5) than controls (4.25) Direct measurement of coherence is next step

27. Take home message • Extended Intuition model can integrate presentiment. • Requires hypothesis that time can ‘run backwards’ • Is able to account for individual differences (coherence) • Gives falsifiable predictions • Physics can accommodate paranormal phenomena. • Time-symmetry & Advanced Solutions • Emotions are not essential for paranormal phenomena

28. Thanks The University of Amsterdam The University of Groningen Colleagues Steven Scholte (fMRI experiments) Victor Lamme (Support) Jacob Jolij (uni. Groningen: Necker cube) Researchers into paranormal phenomena Bial foundation The audience