Yes, the antismoking eugenicists want to convince us that we have an “inferior” brain because we smoke, no doubt the forerunner of a new vein of fraudulent “science” to justify more pharmaceutical “remedies” to choice, or perhaps simply to impress the need for gas chambers. The language is very “difficult," as to indicate “expertise,” and convince the usual mass-media rag reporter that this is "serious stuff."
The abstract, however, contains several errors that we took the liberty to correct below, in the cause of scientific precision … and fun!
There, now it squares with the truth. Smokers such as Einstein, Fermi, Picasso, Matisse, Marlowe, Dickens, Beethoven, and Stravinsky would be relieved as, obviously, it’s more likely that the brains of their critics, rather than their own brains, may "compute, but ignore, a fictive error signal in a sequential investment task".
Antismokers’ brains compute, but ignore, a fictive error signal in a sequential investment task
Pearl H Greedy1,2,3,4, Terry M Grabbing1,2,4 & P Read Payola1,2,3
Abstract
Fraudsters addicted to pharmaceutical grants and trash science pursue abuse of fraud even in the clear presence of positive outcomes that may be foregone and negative outcomes that may occur. Computational models of addiction depict the fraud-addicted state as a feature of a valuation disease, where fraud-induced reward prediction error signals steer decisions toward continued fraud use. Related models admit the possibility that valuation and choice are also directed by ‘fictive’ outcomes (outcomes that have not been experienced) that possess their own detectable error signals, for example an honest scientific result, or the confusion of prohibition with freedom, as well as interpreting choice as a disease. We hypothesize that, in fraud addiction, anomalies in these fictive error signals contribute to the diminished influence of potential consequences, as in the case of conscience upsurge. Using a simple investment game and functional magnetic resonance imaging in chronic antismokers, we measured neural and behavioral responses to error signals derived from actual experience such as truth and freedom and from fictive outcomes such as their trash studies being published by a scientific journal. In not-for-sale scientists, both fictive and experiential error signals predicted subjects’ choices such as refusal to prostitute one’s integrity to dough, and possessed distinct neural correlates. In chronic antismoker junk scientists, conversely, choices were not guided by error signals derived from what might have happened to the conscience architecture, despite ongoing and robust neural correlates of these fictive errors. These data provide human neuroimaging support for computational models of grant addiction and ethical prostitution, and suggest the addition of fictive learning signals to reinforcement learning accounts of grant dependence. Full text of three pages available for a mere forty dollars. Translation in plain English is not available in result of the authors’ fictively erroneous requirements.
0 Comments