Understanding the Decisions We Make
Why are some people greater risk-takers at the gambling table and in life? Do multi-taskers learn better than people who prefer to work without distraction? What prevents some users but not others from taking yet another hit of their favorite drug?

These and other questions about human decision-making lie at the center of Russ Poldrack's research. Poldrack, UCLA associate professor of psychology, holds the newly-endowed Wendell Jeffrey and Bernice Wenzel Term Chair in Behavioral Neuroscience. He and his team are at the forefront of using medical resonance imaging (MRI) to uncover clues about how mental processes are created in the brain, and potentially to find treatments to problems such as drug abuse and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. We sat down to talk with him about where he gets the ideas for his research, and how private support advances his work.

A: Our research tries to understand the creation of mental processes in the brain. There are three main areas we're working on in the lab right now. One involves learning and memory, particularly forms of learning that involve developing new habits and learning skills. A second area is executive control; in other words, how is it that we stop ourselves from doing things and don't succumb to all our impulses? The third area explores decision-making, and why we make the choices we do. In all these studies, we use MRI to watch brain activity as participants make choices or perform tasks.

Q: Some of those tasks seem very simple, such as stating whether one would agree to a hypothetical wager, or pressing a button several times and then stopping. But these tasks carry important implications, don't they?

A: Yes. One of our goals is to translate findings from basic research into a better understanding of what happens in some psychiatric and neurological disorders. One study tries to understand how people stop themselves from doing things, such as stepping on the gas when they shouldn't. It turns out that at least some of the brain systems involved in a simple task such as stepping on a brake are also implicated in things like drug abuse. The results may lead us to treatments that can help improve these brain processes, thereby improving a person's ability to stay off a drug.

Q: What sparks the idea for a particular research study?

A: Some ideas begin with people coming to us from other fields with a particular disorder they're trying to understand. Others come from thinking about everyday decisions and mistakes we all make, and the kinds of habits we develop. A good example of how habits can lead you astray is your daily route to work. Your brain's habit system takes over so that you don't really have to think about it. But if you need to turn off somewhere to run an errand and aren't paying close attention, you might miss your turn. Those kinds of common experiences drive many of the questions we ask.

Q: You were recently named to the Wendell Jeffrey and Bernice Wenzel Term Chair in Behavioral Neuroscience. What does the chair mean to you?

A: I'm honored to receive it. It's an incredibly important statement of confidence in my work. In addition to supporting research, the chair provides valuable unrestricted funds. These funds support many of the things that federal grants don't. One of them is travel for my students and staff. I believe it's important for them to be able to attend conferences every year. It's important for their career development, and it's important for the research. Unrestricted funds also pay for items that enrich the lab but aren't tied to a specific project.

Q: What about your work has surprised you most?

A: It's highlighted the importance of looking outside my field for inspiration. Economics, for example, has brought us a lot of insight and influenced how we approach our work. Real discovery comes from not being confined to intellectual boundaries.

Q: Has your research changed how you look at your own choices?

A: Yes, especially the research related to risk, which shows that people often make decisions that aren't optimal because they are more attuned to negative consequences than positive consequences. I recently bought a car, and had to decide whether or not to get the extended warranty. Had I not been doing the kind of work I do, I probably would have bought it. But knowing from my research that we often make those kinds of decisions for reasons that aren't rational, I decided not to get the warranty. So my research has definitely influenced my own decision-making process.