title: Market mechanisms protect the vulnerable brain.
abstract: Markets are mechanisms of social exchange, intended to facilitate trading. However, the question remains as to whether markets would help or hurt individuals with decision-makings deficits, as is frequently encountered in the case of cognitive aging. Essential for predicting future gains and losses in monetary and social domains, the striatal nuclei in the brain undergo structural, neurochemical, and functional decline with age. We correlated the efficacy of market mechanisms with dorsal striatal decline in an aging population, by using market based trading in the context of the 2008 U.S. Presidential Elections (primary cycle). Impaired decision-makers displayed higher prediction error (difference between their prediction and actual outcome). Lower in vivo caudate volume was also associated with higher prediction error. Importantly, market-based trading protected older adults with lower caudate volume to a greater extent from their own poorly calibrated predictions. Counterintuitive to the traditional public perception of the market as a fickle, risky proposition where vulnerable traders are most surely to be burned, we suggest that market-based mechanisms protect individuals with brain-based decision-making vulnerabilities.
authors: Department of Neurology, UIHC 200 Hawkins Drive, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA. kanchna-ramchandran@uiowa.edu
authors: Kanchna
authors: K
authors: Ramchandran
authors: Dhananjay
authors: D
authors: Nayakankuppam
authors: Joyce
authors: J
authors: Berg
authors: Daniel
authors: D
authors: Tranel
authors: Natalie L
authors: NL
authors: Denburg
references: Comput Med Imaging Graph. 2002 Jul-Aug;26(4):251-64
references: 12074920
references: J Neurophysiol. 2006 Feb;95(2):948-59
references: 16192338
references: Nat Neurosci. 2007 Jun;10(6):787-91
references: 17468751
references: Neuropsychol Rev. 2009 Mar;19(1):102-14
references: 19194801
references: Cereb Cortex. 2005 Nov;15(11):1676-89
references: 15703252
references: Neuroimage. 2008 Jan 1;39(1):238-47
references: 17904870
references: Science. 1974 Sep 27;185(4157):1124-31
references: 17835457
references: Neuropsychol Rev. 2009 Dec;19(4):411-4
references: 19936932
references: J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2007 May;13(3):480-9
references: 17445297
references: Science. 2008 May 23;320(5879):1092-5
references: 18467558
references: Neuroimage. 2009 Oct 1;47(4):1929-39
references: 19442744
references: Ann Behav Med. 2009 Apr;37(2):164-72
references: 19350336
references: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008 Dec 12;363(1511):3767-9
references: 18829431
references: Annu Rev Neurosci. 2000;23:473-500
references: 10845072
references: Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2006;30(6):791-807
references: 16901542
references: Neuropsychol Rev. 2009 Dec;19(4):490-503
references: 19813093
references: Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2008 Sep;8(3):304-17
references: 18814467
references: Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2007 Dec;1121:480-98
references: 17872394
references: Neuropsychologia. 2005;43(7):1099-106
references: 15769495
references: Int J Psychophysiol. 2006 Jul;61(1):19-25
references: 16426691
references: Brain. 2007 Sep;130(Pt 9):2412-24
references: 17626038
references: Nat Rev Neurosci. 2006 Jun;7(6):464-76
references: 16715055
references: J Neurosci. 2010 Jan 27;30(4):1426-34
references: 20107069
references: Trends Neurosci. 2009 May;32(5):283-90
references: 19349082
references: Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2003 Mar;3(1):27-38
references: 12822596
references: Neurobiol Aging. 2011 May;32(5):916-32
references: 19570593
references: Perspect Biol Med. 2003 Summer;46(3 Suppl):S39-52
references: 14563073
references: Science. 2009 May 29;324(5931):1160-4
references: 19478175
references: Science. 1997 Mar 14;275(5306):1593-9
references: 9054347