The innovative brain

Lawrence, Andrew J.; Clark, Luke; LaBuzetta, Jamie Nicole; Sahakian, Barbara J.; Vyakarnum, Shai

doi:10.1038/456168a

Cited by 68 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…81 The earlier N200 latency seen in founder entrepreneurs may be influenced by their functional impulsivity, ie, a tendency to act with relatively little forethought. 62,63 On the other hand, impulsivity has been reported as a key factor influencing very basic perceptual and memory processes. [82][83][84][85][86][87][88] It would seem that founder entrepreneurs may have better skills for adaptation and modulation of their behavior according to the goal they are pursuing, ie, their attention is focused on goal-relevant information that will enhance selection of a response.…”

Section: Differences In Reaction Times and Erp Latenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although it is arguable that decisions related to a company made by entrepreneurs are not devoid of reward or punishment, some authors have stated that cold processes govern real-life decisions, such as planning the details related to opening a new company branch. 62 …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These dimensions are more prominent in founder entrepreneurs and match with the overall personality one might anticipate in this group. Lawrence et al 62 labeled this entrepreneur impulsivity trait "functional impulsivity", ie, something more related to activity, enthusiasm, and adventurousness. 63 High scores on eagerness of effort may be related to pursuit of achievement by entrepreneurs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Brain cortical organization in entrepreneurs during a visual Stroop decision task

Ortiz-Terán¹,

Turrero²,

Santos³

et al. 2013

NAN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decision-making in entrepreneurs is a key aspect of their skills, but much about these processes remains unexplained. During a Stroop task, concomitant N200, P300, and N450 eventrelated potentials were measured in 25 founder entrepreneurs and in age-matched and gendermatched nonfounders/nonentrepreneurs (NFNE). Reaction times were shorter among founder entrepreneurs. The N200 was shorter and N450 larger in founder entrepreneurs. The personalities of both groups were measured using the Temperament and Character Inventory-Revised. Founder entrepreneurs scored significantly higher in novelty-seeking and self-directedness dimensions, as well as in exploratory excitability, impulsiveness, optimism, eagerness, and responsibility subdimensions. Possible interactions among candidate variables to differentiate between founder entrepreneurs versus NFNE were also addressed, and the model including impulsivity, N450 latency, and impulsivity*N450 interaction came up as the best model for discrimination between founder entrepreneurs and NFNE. A shorter N200, mostly associated with bilateral supplementary motor area activation, revealed a faster capability to make decisions when information was noncongruent or blurred. However, the larger N450 revealed a more intense post-evaluation cognitive process happening in founder entrepreneurs and was accompanied by a greater activation of anterior frontal regions. The whole decision-making process consumed more time and resources in founder entrepreneurs, even if its closure was faster. Attention, memory, and alertness, among other factors, have been invoked to explain some of these differences. Founder entrepreneurs may have cognitive and heuristic differences compared with the general population.

show abstract

Section: Differences In Reaction Times and Erp Latenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Brain cortical organization in entrepreneurs during a visual Stroop decision task

Ortiz-Terán¹,

Turrero²,

Santos³

et al. 2013

NAN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One way to use neuroscience in this context is to examine the extent to which and in what ways entrepreneurs' brains differ from those of managers and/or other groups of organizational actors, for example in terms of their sensitivity to risk (Becker et al, 2011;Nicolaou et al, 2008aNicolaou et al, , 2008bSenior et al, 2011). The assumption underpinning this approach is that entrepreneurs possess distinctive neuroanatomical features -concerning the dopaminergic regions of the brain's reward centres -that hardwires them for the kind of 'functional impulsivity' (Lawrence et al, 2008) required for risk seeking behavior when facing highstakes (i.e. affect-laden) investment prospects.…”

Section: Ecological Embeddedness: Organizational Neuroscience and Socmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, there are signs that this is already happening, with a rush to place leaders, managers and entrepreneurs in brain scanners (Balthazard et al, 2012;Hannah et al, 2013;Laureiro-Martínez et al, 2010, in press;Lawrence et al, 2008). However, as Glimcher (2011) cautions in the context of neuroeconomics, historical attempts to fuse the social and natural sciences are littered with hundreds of papers drawing faulty conclusions because of confusion about basic philosophical issues.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking the philosophical and theoretical foundations of organizational neuroscience: A critical realist alternative

Healey

Hodgkinson

2014

Human Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stimulated by the growing use of brain imaging and related neurophysiological techniques in psychology and economics, scholars have begun to debate the implications of neuroscience for management and organization studies (MOS). Currently, this debate is polarizing scholarly opinion. At one extreme, advocates are calling for a new neuroscience of organizations, which they claim will revolutionize understanding of a wide range of key processes, with significant implications for management practice. At the other extreme, detractors are decrying the relevance of neuroscience for MOS, primarily on philosophical and ethical grounds. The present article progresses this debate by outlining an intermediate, critical realist position, in which the insights of social neuroscience are one of a number of convergent building blocks that together point toward the need for a more embodied and socially situated view of cognition in management and organizations.

show abstract

Ageing as a price of cooperation and complexity

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The network concept is increasingly used for the description of complex systems. Here we summarize key aspects of the evolvability and robustness of the hierarchical network-set of macromolecules, cells, organisms, and ecosystems. Listing the costs and benefits of cooperation as a necessary behaviour to build this network hierarchy, we outline the major hypothesis of the paper: the emergence of hierarchical complexity needs cooperation leading to the ageing (i.e. gradual deterioration) of the constituent networks. A stable environment develops cooperation leading to over-optimization, and forming an 'always-old' network, which accumulates damage, and dies in an apoptosis-like process. A rapidly changing environment develops competition forming a 'forever-young' network, which may suffer an occasional overperturbation exhausting system-resources, and causing death in a necrosis-like process. Giving a number of examples we demonstrate how cooperation evokes the gradual accumulation of damage typical to ageing. Finally, we show how various forms of cooperation and consequent ageing emerge as key elements in all major steps of evolution from the formation of protocells to the establishment of the globalized, modern human society. Introduction: Evolvability, robustness and ageing of hierarchical networksThe network approach proved to be a highly efficient tool to describe various levels of the hierarchical organization of complex systems from macromolecules to the currently emerging world-wide social networks. The network description needs the identification of separable subsets of the system as network elements, and a catalogue of their interactions as network contacts or links. In most of the cases network elements themselves can be perceived as networks. Thus, elements of social networks, human individuals are networks of organs and cells, cells are networks of proteins, and proteins are networks of amino acids. Networks display a lot of rather general properties, such as (a) small-worldness, meaning the existence of short pathways between most network elements; (b) the existence of hubs, which have a much higher number of neighbours than the average; (c) a modular structure, which organizes networks to various overlapping groups; (d) the co-existence of strong and weak links, where the link-strength is usually defined as the real, physical strength of the connection, or as the probability of interactions and (e) the existence of a network skeleton, which is the subset of most important pathways in the network. Regretfully, the scope of the current paper does not allow us to give exact definitions and a detailed description of all these network properties, therefore, the reader is referred to a number of recent reviews for more details. (1)(2)(3)(4)

show abstract

The innovative brain

Cited by 68 publications

References 10 publications

Brain cortical organization in entrepreneurs during a visual Stroop decision task

Brain cortical organization in entrepreneurs during a visual Stroop decision task

Rethinking the philosophical and theoretical foundations of organizational neuroscience: A critical realist alternative

Ageing as a price of cooperation and complexity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About