[Paleopsych] Guardian: Where belief is born
checker at panix.com
Wed Jul 6 00:28:49 UTC 2005
Where belief is born
Scientists have begun to look in a different way at how the brain
creates the convictions that mould our relationships and inform our
behaviour. Alok Jha reports
Thursday June 30, 2005
Belief can make people do the strangest things. At one level, it
provides a moral framework, sets preferences and steers relationships.
On another, it can be devastating. Belief can manifest itself as
prejudice or persuade someone to blow up themselves and others in the
name of a political cause.
"Belief has been a most powerful component of human nature that has
somewhat been neglected," says Peter Halligan, a psychologist at
Cardiff University. "But it has been capitalised on by marketing
agents, politics and religion for the best part of two millennia."
That is changing. Once the preserve of philosophers alone, belief is
quickly becoming the subject of choice for many psychologists and
neuroscientists. Their goal is to create a neurological model of how
beliefs are formed, how they affect people and what can manipulate
And the latest steps in the research might just help to understand a
little more about why the world is so fraught with political and
social tension. Matthew Lieberman, a psychologist at the University of
California, recently showed how beliefs help people's brains
categorise others and view objects as good or bad, largely
unconsciously. He demonstrated that beliefs (in this case prejudice or
fear) are most likely to be learned from the prevailing culture.
When Lieberman showed a group of people photographs of expressionless
black faces, he was surprised to find that the amygdala - the brain's
panic button - was triggered in almost two-thirds of cases. There was
no difference in the response between black and white people.
The amygdala is responsible for the body's fight or flight response,
setting off a chain of biological changes that prepare the body to
respond to danger well before the brain is conscious of any threat.
Lieberman suggests that people are likely to pick up on stereotypes,
regardless of whether their family or community agrees with them.
The work, published last month in Nature Neuroscience, is the latest
in a rapidly growing field of research called "social neuroscience", a
wide arena which draws together psychologists, neuroscientists and
anthropologists all studying the neural basis for the social
interaction between humans.
Traditionally, cognitive neuroscientists focused on scanning the
brains of people doing specific tasks such as eating or listening to
music, while social psychologists and social scientists concentrated
on groups of people and the interactions between them. To understand
how the brain makes sense of the world, it was inevitable that these
two groups would have to get together.
"In the West, most of our physical needs are provided for. We have a
level of luxury and civilisation that is pretty much unparalleled,"
says Kathleen Taylor, a neuroscientist at Oxford University. "That
leaves us with a lot more leisure and more space in our heads for
Beliefs and ideas therefore become our currency, says Taylor. Society
is no longer a question of simple survival; it is about choice of
companions and views, pressures, ideas, options and preferences.
"It is quite an exciting development but for people outside the field,
a very obvious one," says Halligan.
Understanding belief is not a trivial task, even for the seemingly
simplest of human interactions. Take a conversation between two
people. When one talks, the other's brain is processing information
through their auditory system at a phenomenal rate. That person's
beliefs act as filters for the deluge of sensory information and guide
the brain's response.
Lieberman's recent work echoed parts of earlier research by Joel
Winston of the University of London's Wellcome Department of Imaging
Neuroscience. Winston found that when he presented people with
pictures of faces and asked them to rate the trustworthiness of each,
the amygdalas showed a greater response to pictures of people who were
specifically chosen to represent untrustworthiness. And it did not
matter what each person actually said about the pictured faces.
"Even people who believe to their core that they do not have
prejudices may still have negative associations that are not
conscious," says Lieberman.
Beliefs also provide stability. When a new piece of sensory
information comes in, it is assessed against these knowledge units
before the brain works out whether or not it should be incorporated.
People do it when they test the credibility of a politician or hear
about a paranormal event.
Physically speaking, then, how does a belief exist in the brain? "My
own position is to think of beliefs and memories as very similar,"
says Taylor. Memories are formed in the brain as networks of neurons
that fire when stimulated by an event. The more times the network is
employed, the more it fires and the stronger the memory becomes.
Halligan says that belief takes the concept of memory a step further.
"A belief is a mental architecture of how we interpret the world," he
says. "We have lots of fluid things moving by - perceptions and so
forth - but at the level of who our friends are and so on, those
things are consolidated in crystallised knowledge units. If we did not
have those, every time we woke up, how would we know who we are?"
These knowledge units help to assess threats - via the amygdala -
based on experience. Ralph Adolphs, a neurologist at the University of
Iowa, found that if the amygdala was damaged, the ability of a person
to recognise expressions of fear was impaired. A separate study by
Adolphs with Simon Baron-Cohen at Cambridge University showed that
amygdala damage had a bigger negative impact on the brain's ability to
recognise social emotions, while more basic emotions seemed
This work on the amygdala shows it is a key part of the
threat-assessment response and, in no small part, in the formation of
beliefs. Damage to this alarm bell - and subsequent inability to judge
when a situation might be dangerous - can be life-threatening. In
hunter-gatherer days, beliefs may have been fundamental to human
Neuroscientists have long looked at brains that do not function
properly to understand how healthy ones work. Researchers of belief
formation do the same thing, albeit with a twist. "You look at people
who have delusions," says Halligan. "The assumption is that a delusion
is a false belief. That is saying that the content of it is wrong, but
it still has the construct of a belief."
In people suffering from prosopagnosia, for example, parts of the
brain are damaged so that the person can no longer recognise faces. In
the Cotard delusion, people believe they are dead. Fregoli delusion is
the belief that the sufferer is constantly being followed around by
people in disguise. Capgras' delusion, named after its discoverer, the
French psychiatrist Jean Marie Joseph Capgras, is a belief that
someone emotionally close has been replaced by an identical impostor.
Until recently, these conditions were regarded as psychiatric
problems. But closer study reveals that, in the case of Capgras'
delusion for example, a significant proportion of sufferers had
lesions in their brain, typically in the right hemisphere.
"There are studies indicating that some people who have suffered brain
damage retain some of their religious or political beliefs," says
Halligan. "That's interesting because whatever beliefs are, they must
be held in memory."
Another route to understanding how beliefs form is to look at how they
can be manipulated. In her book on the history of brainwashing, Taylor
describes how everyone from the Chinese thought reform camps of the
last century to religious cults have used systematic methods to
persuade people to change their ideas, sometimes radically.
The first step is to isolate a person and control what information
they receive. Their former beliefs need to be challenged by creating
uncertainty. New messages need to be repeated endlessly. And the whole
thing needs to be done in a pressured, emotional environment.
"Beliefs are mental objects in the sense that they are embedded in the
brain," says Taylor. "If you challenge them by contradiction, or just
by cutting them off from the stimuli that make you think about them,
then they are going to weaken slightly. If that is combined with very
strong reinforcement of new beliefs, then you're going to get a shift
in emphasis from one to the other."
The mechanism Taylor describes is similar to the way the brain learns
normally. In brainwashing though, the new beliefs are inserted through
a much more intensified version of that process.
This manipulation of belief happens every day. Politics is a fertile
arena, especially in times of anxiety.
"Stress affects the brain such that it makes people more likely to
fall back on things they know well - stereotypes and simple ways of
thinking," says Taylor.
"It is very easy to want to do that when everything you hold dear is
being challenged. In a sense, it was after 9/11."
The stress of the terror attacks on the US in 2001 changed the way
many Americans viewed the world, and Taylor argues that it left the
population open to tricks of belief manipulation. A recent survey, for
example, found that more than half of Americans thought Iraqis were
involved in the attacks, despite the fact that nobody had come out and
This method of association uses the brain against itself. If an event
stimulates two sets of neurons, then the links between them get
stronger. If one of them activates, it is more likely that the second
set will also fire. In the real world, those two memories may have
little to do with each other, but in the brain, they get associated.
Taylor cites an example from a recent manifesto by the British
National Party, which argues that asylum seekers have been dumped on
Britain and that they should be made to clear up rubbish from the
streets. "What they are trying to do is to link the notion of asylum
seekers with all the negative emotions you get from reading about
garbage, [but] they are not actually coming out and saying asylum
seekers are garbage," she says.
The 9/11 attacks highlight another extreme in the power of beliefs.
"Belief could drive people to agree to premeditate something like that
in the full knowledge that they would all die," says Halligan of the
It is unlikely that beliefs as wide-ranging as justice, religion,
prejudice or politics are simply waiting to be found in the brain as
discrete networks of neurons, each encoding for something different.
"There's probably a whole combination of things that go together,"
And depending on the level of significance of a belief, there could be
several networks at play. Someone with strong religious beliefs, for
example, might find that they are more emotionally drawn into certain
discussions because they have a large number of neural networks
feeding into that belief.
"If you happen to have a predisposition, racism for example, then it
may be that you see things in a certain way and you will explain it in
a certain way," says Halligan.
He argues that the reductionist approach of social neuroscience will
alter the way people study society. "If you are brain scanning, what
are the implications for privacy in terms of knowing another's
thoughts? And being able to use those, as some governments are
implying, in terms of being able to detect terrorists and things like
that," he says. "If you move down the line in terms of potential uses
for these things, you have potential uses for education and for
treatments being used as cognitive enhancers."
So far, social neuroscience has provided more questions than answers.
Ralph Adolphs of the University of Iowa looked to the future in a
review paper for Nature. "How can causal networks explain the many
correlations between brain and behaviour that we are discovering? Can
large-scale social behaviour, as studied by political science and
economics, be understood by studying social cognition in individual
subjects? Finally, what power will insights from cognitive
neuroscience give us to influence social behaviour, and hence society?
And to what extent would such pursuit be morally defensible?"
The answers to those questions may well shape people's understanding
of what it really means to believe.
More information about the paleopsych