Gambling against neglect: unconscious spatial biases induced by reward reinforcement in healthy people and brain-damaged patients.

Orienting attention in space recruits fronto-parietal networks whose damage results in unilateral spatial neglect. However, attention orienting may also be governed by emotional and motivational factors; but it remains unknown whether these factors act through a modulation of the fronto-parietal attentional systems or distinct neural pathways. Here we asked whether attentional orienting is affected by learning about the reward value of targets in a visual search task, in a spatially specific manner, and whether these effects are preserved in right-brain damaged patients with left spatial neglect. We found that associating rewards with left-sided (but not right-sided) targets during search led to progressive exploration biases towards left space, in both healthy people and neglect patients. Such spatially specific biases occurred even without any conscious awareness of the asymmetric reward contingencies. These results show that reward-induced modulations of space representation are preserved despite a dysfunction of fronto-parietal networks associated with neglect, and therefore suggest that they may arise through spared subcortical networks directly acting on sensory processing and/or oculomotor circuits. These effects could be usefully exploited for potentiating rehabilitation strategies in neglect patients.

"A Hard Battle to Fight": Natural Theology and the Dismal Science, 1820-1850

William Whewell's and Richard Jones's criticism of Jeremy Bentham's and David Ricardo's "dismal" views on the relation of theory and evidence in political economy was motivated by the former's views on the structuring role of natural theology for questions of method and evidence in the sciences, including political economy. In comparison, natural theology was for Richard Whately as structuring on these issues as it was for the Cambridge men. Whately's view on natural theology, however, conformed with the Ricardian predilection for theory over facts. The differences between the Cambridge men and Whately became manifest after (or better: during) the publication of Jones's book on rent in 1831 and led to a somewhat acerbic exchange of views on the role of definitions in science and the use of history for establishing scientific evidence. As far as political economy was concerned, Whately's stance carried the day in Victorian England.

No Evidence for moral reward and punishment in an anonymous context.

Human social interactions are regulated by moral norms that define individual obligations and rights. These norms are enforced by punishment of transgressors and reward of followers. Yet, the generality and strength of this drive to punish or reward is unclear, especially when people are not personally involved in the situation and when the actual impact of their sanction is only indirect, i.e., when it diminishes or promotes the social status of the punished or rewarded individual. In a real-life study, we investigated if people are inclined to anonymously punish or reward a person for her past deeds in a different social context. Participants from three socio-professional categories voted anonymously for early career violinists in an important violin competition. We found that participants did not punish an immoral violin candidate, nor did they reward another hyper-moral candidate. On the contrary, one socio-professional category sanctioned hyper-morality. Hence, salient moral information about past behavior did not elicit punishment or reward in an impersonal situation where the impact of the sanction was indirect. We conclude that contextual features play an important role in human motivation to enforce moral norms.