This article on neuropsychology in business decision-making examines how brain-based insights illuminate the cognitive and emotional processes shaping business choices, offering a vital perspective within business psychology foundations. It explores the neural underpinnings of decision-making, from the amygdala’s role in balancing emotion and logic to the prefrontal cortex’s influence on planning and impulse control. Key topics include dopamine-driven reward systems motivating business behavior, neuroplasticity enabling strategic adaptation, and the hippocampus’s impact on memory-informed decisions. The discussion extends to stress and cognitive fatigue’s effects on executive function, neural foundations of risk assessment, and social neuroscience’s role in team dynamics. Practical applications, such as neuromarketing, demonstrate how neuropsychology in business enhances consumer engagement. By synthesizing these insights, the article underscores their significance in optimizing leadership, mitigating uncertainty, and fostering resilience, providing a comprehensive resource for understanding how the brain drives business success.
Introduction
Neuropsychology, the study of how brain structures and functions underpin behavior and cognition, offers profound insights into business decision-making, enriching the field of business psychology. By examining neural processes—ranging from emotional responses to logical analysis—this discipline reveals the biological roots of choices that shape organizational strategies, leadership effectiveness, and market interactions. In an era where decisions dictate competitive advantage, understanding the brain’s role in processing information, managing risk, and adapting to change is not merely academic but a practical necessity for business success.
The significance of neuropsychology in business lies in its ability to decode the interplay between instinct and deliberation, emotion and reason, that governs human action. Business leaders, employees, and consumers alike operate within neural frameworks that influence their perceptions, motivations, and judgments. For instance, the brain’s reward systems drive motivation through dopamine, while stress alters executive function, impacting high-stakes choices. These insights enable businesses to refine training, enhance decision-making, and craft strategies that align with human neurology, optimizing outcomes in dynamic environments.
This article explores neuropsychology in business through twelve subordinate topics, each illuminating a facet of brain-based decision-making. “Brain Basics” establishes how neuroscience explains business choices, while “Emotion and Logic” examines the amygdala’s dual role. The “Prefrontal Cortex” addresses planning and impulse control in leadership, and “Reward Systems” highlights dopamine’s motivational impact. “Stress and the Brain” and “Cognitive Fatigue” assess neural limits in executive decisions, complemented by “Neuroplasticity” as a tool for strategic learning. “Risk Assessment” delves into uncertainty’s neural foundations, “Intuition vs. Analysis” contrasts gut feelings with deliberation, and “Memory and Decisions” explores the hippocampus’s influence. “Social Neuroscience” covers team dynamics, and “Neuromarketing” applies these principles to consumer preferences. These topics collectively demonstrate how neuropsychology in business bridges theory and application, offering a comprehensive framework for enhancing business psychology through brain-based insights.
Foundations of Neuropsychology in Business
Neuropsychology provides a scientific lens to understand decision-making in business, grounding behavioral outcomes in brain function. This section explores the foundational neural mechanisms—basic brain operations, reward systems, and neuroplasticity—that underpin choices, motivation, and adaptability, establishing the bedrock of neuropsychology in business.
Brain Basics: How Neuroscience Explains Business Choices
The human brain, a complex network of approximately 86 billion neurons, orchestrates every business decision through specialized regions and circuits (Herculano-Houzel, 2009). The cerebral cortex handles higher-order thinking—planning, reasoning, and problem-solving—while subcortical structures like the amygdala and basal ganglia manage emotions and habits. Neurotransmitters, such as dopamine and serotonin, modulate these processes, influencing attention, mood, and reward perception. In business, this neural architecture explains why a leader might prioritize short-term gains (emotional impulse) over long-term strategy (cortical analysis), reflecting the brain’s dual processing systems (Kahneman, 2011).
Decisions emerge from the interplay of these regions. The ventral striatum, part of the reward system, activates when anticipating profits, while the prefrontal cortex evaluates risks. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies (e.g., Bechara et al., 2000) show that damage to these areas impairs judgment, underscoring their role in rational choice. Neuropsychology in business thus reveals how neural wiring shapes everyday actions—hiring, investing, or negotiating—offering a biological basis for optimizing decision-making processes.
This foundational understanding extends to organizational dynamics, where neural interactions influence collective behavior. For example, a team’s response to a looming deadline reflects synchronized cortical and subcortical activity—stress heightening amygdala alertness while the cortex coordinates tasks. By mapping these processes, businesses can design environments that align with natural brain function, such as structuring workflows to balance emotional drive with analytical rigor, enhancing both individual and group decision-making efficacy.
Reward Systems: Dopamine’s Impact on Business Motivation
Dopamine, a neurotransmitter central to the brain’s reward system, drives motivation and reinforces behavior in business contexts. Originating in the midbrain’s ventral tegmental area, dopamine floods the nucleus accumbens and prefrontal cortex during rewarding experiences—monetary gains, recognition, or goal attainment—creating a feedback loop that encourages repetition (Schultz, 2016). In sales teams, commissions trigger dopamine release, boosting effort, as evidenced in studies of incentive structures (e.g., Condly et al., 2003), where performance-linked rewards increased productivity by 20-30%.
This system’s influence extends beyond immediate rewards. Anticipation of future gains—stock options or promotions—sustains long-term motivation, a principle exploited in employee retention strategies. However, dopamine’s sensitivity to novelty means diminishing returns; static rewards lose potency over time (Berridge & Robinson, 2016). Businesses must thus vary incentives, aligning neuropsychology in business with dynamic motivation models to maintain engagement and drive consistent performance.
The broader implications of dopamine in business decision-making include its role in risk-taking and innovation. High dopamine levels can push leaders to pursue bold strategies, such as entering uncharted markets, fueled by the thrill of potential rewards. Conversely, low dopamine states might dampen initiative, stalling progress. By understanding these fluctuations, organizations can tailor incentive timing—offering boosts during slumps—or pair rewards with challenging goals, leveraging neuropsychology in business to sustain momentum and foster a culture of proactive achievement.
Neuroplasticity: Adapting Business Strategies Through Learning
Neuroplasticity, the brain’s capacity to reorganize neural pathways through experience, enables businesses to adapt strategies via learning. Hebb’s (1949) axiom—“neurons that fire together wire together”—underpins this process: repeated practice strengthens synaptic connections, enhancing skills or shifting perspectives. For instance, a manager trained in data analysis rewires neural circuits, improving strategic foresight over time (Pascual-Leone et al., 2005). This adaptability is critical in volatile markets, where leaders must pivot rapidly.
Neuroplasticity also supports organizational learning. Training programs leveraging repetition and feedback—such as simulations—exploit plasticity to embed new routines, as seen in firms adopting agile methodologies (Draganski et al., 2004). However, plasticity wanes with age and stress, requiring sustained effort to overcome inertia. By harnessing this mechanism, neuropsychology in business fosters resilience, enabling leaders and teams to refine decisions and innovate continuously in response to changing demands.
Beyond individual adaptation, neuroplasticity facilitates cultural shifts within organizations. For example, a company transitioning to sustainable practices can reinforce this through consistent messaging and practice, gradually rewiring collective neural patterns to prioritize long-term value over short-term profit. This scalability highlights how neuropsychology in business extends from personal skill development to systemic change, embedding flexibility into the organizational fabric and ensuring alignment with evolving market realities.
Emotional and Cognitive Drivers of Decisions
Decision-making in business reflects an interplay between emotion and cognition, mediated by distinct brain regions. This section examines how the amygdala, prefrontal cortex, and intuitive processes shape choices, highlighting their roles within neuropsychology in business.
Emotion and Logic: The Amygdala’s Role in Decision-Making
The amygdala, an almond-shaped structure in the limbic system, governs emotional responses, influencing business decisions where logic alone proves insufficient. It processes fear, excitement, and anger, activating during high-stakes choices—e.g., a merger negotiation—where emotional stakes amplify rational analysis (LeDoux, 1996). fMRI studies (e.g., Phelps, 2004) reveal heightened amygdala activity when leaders face ambiguous threats, skewing decisions toward caution or aggression.
Balancing emotion and logic is key. The amygdala interacts with the prefrontal cortex, modulating impulses with reasoned judgment. In consumer choices, emotional branding triggers amygdala-driven affinity, while logical cost-benefit analysis tempers enthusiasm (Damasio, 1994). Dysregulation—overactive amygdala responses—can lead to panic selling or rash hires, necessitating emotional regulation strategies like mindfulness, which dampen reactivity (Davidson et al., 2003). Neuropsychology in business thus leverages this duality to optimize decision quality.
This emotional-cognitive interplay also shapes workplace dynamics. For instance, an employee facing a tight deadline might experience amygdala-driven anxiety, prompting hasty submissions, while a calmer state fosters thoroughness. Leaders can mitigate this by fostering environments that reduce fear—clear expectations, supportive feedback—allowing the amygdala to enhance, rather than derail, logical processes. This application of neuropsychology in business ensures emotional responses serve as signals, not barriers, to effective decision-making.
Prefrontal Cortex: Planning and Impulse Control in Leadership
The prefrontal cortex (PFC), located behind the forehead, governs executive functions—planning, impulse control, and goal-directed behavior—essential for leadership. Its dorsolateral region orchestrates strategic foresight, as when a CEO maps a five-year plan, while the ventromedial PFC integrates emotional input, tempering rashness (Miller & Cohen, 2001). Lesion studies (e.g., Bechara et al., 2000) show PFC damage leads to impulsivity, affirming its role in deliberate choice.
In business, the PFC enables leaders to delay gratification—investing in R&D over immediate dividends—or resist groupthink in boardrooms. Neuroimaging reveals increased PFC activation during complex decisions (Koechlin & Hyafil, 2007), highlighting its workload. Yet, stress or fatigue can impair PFC function, a challenge addressed later. By strengthening PFC-mediated control, neuropsychology in business enhances leadership efficacy, aligning actions with long-term vision.
The PFC’s role extends to fostering organizational stability. For example, a leader resisting a trendy but untested technology demonstrates impulse control, preserving resources for proven strategies. Training in structured decision-making—scenario analysis, priority setting—bolsters PFC capacity, enabling leaders to navigate uncertainty with composure. This facet of neuropsychology in business underscores how cognitive discipline translates into sustainable leadership, balancing immediate pressures with enduring goals.
Intuition vs. Analysis: Gut Feelings in Business Neuroscience
Intuition, often described as “gut feelings,” contrasts with analytical reasoning, reflecting distinct neural pathways. The insula and anterior cingulate cortex process visceral signals, informing rapid, experience-based decisions (Craig, 2009). A seasoned entrepreneur might reject a deal intuitively, relying on pattern recognition honed by past failures, as Klein’s (1998) recognition-primed model suggests. Analytical decisions, conversely, engage the PFC’s deliberate circuits, weighing data methodically.
Neuropsychology in business reveals their complementarity. fMRI studies (e.g., Lieberman, 2007) show intuition activates subcortical regions faster than PFC-driven analysis, suiting time-sensitive contexts like crisis management. However, over-reliance on intuition risks bias—availability heuristics skewing perception—while analysis can paralyze under uncertainty. Balancing both, as in hybrid models, optimizes outcomes, with training enhancing intuitive accuracy over time (Hogarth, 2001).
This balance influences team dynamics and innovation. A manager trusting a gut instinct to pivot a failing project might spark creativity, while analytical review ensures feasibility. Organizations can cultivate this synergy by pairing intuitive brainstorming with data-driven validation, leveraging past successes to refine instincts. Neuropsychology in business thus equips leaders to harness intuition as a complement to analysis, enhancing adaptability and precision in decision-making.
Stress, Fatigue, and Uncertainty in Decision-Making
The brain’s response to stress, fatigue, and uncertainty profoundly affects business decisions, revealing neural vulnerabilities and strengths. This section explores these dynamics, emphasizing their implications within neuropsychology in business.
Stress and the Brain: Effects on Executive Decisions
Stress, mediated by the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, floods the brain with cortisol, altering executive function. Acute stress enhances amygdala reactivity, sharpening focus on immediate threats—e.g., a market crash—but chronic stress impairs the PFC, reducing planning capacity (Arnsten, 2009). A stressed executive might overreact to minor setbacks, neglecting strategic priorities, as cortisol disrupts prefrontal-hippocampal communication (McEwen, 2017).
In business, stress impacts vary. Short bursts can boost performance under deadlines, but prolonged exposure, as in burnout, degrades judgment. Studies (e.g., Liston et al., 2009) show reversible PFC shrinkage under chronic stress, mitigated by rest or mindfulness, which lowers cortisol (Tang et al., 2015). Neuropsychology in business thus advocates stress management—structured breaks, resilience training—to safeguard decision-making integrity.
The ripple effects of stress extend to organizational culture. A stressed leadership team may foster a reactive environment, prioritizing short-term fixes over innovation, while calm leaders model stability, encouraging measured responses. By integrating stress-reduction practices—team wellness programs, flexible schedules—businesses can leverage neuropsychology in business to maintain executive clarity, ensuring decisions reflect strategic intent rather than emotional turbulence.
Cognitive Fatigue: Brain Limits in High-Stakes Decisions
Cognitive fatigue, the depletion of mental resources from sustained effort, limits decision-making in high-stakes contexts. The PFC, reliant on glucose and oxygen, fatigues after prolonged focus—e.g., marathon negotiations—reducing inhibitory control and increasing errors (Boksem & Tops, 2008). Judges exhibit harsher rulings later in sessions (Danziger et al., 2011), a pattern mirrored in business where late-day choices falter.
Neuropsychology in business addresses this through resource management. Breaks restore PFC function, while task prioritization—focusing on critical decisions early—mitigates decline (Hagger et al., 2010). Chronic fatigue, linked to sleep deprivation, compounds risks, necessitating workplace policies promoting rest. By respecting these neural limits, businesses enhance decision consistency and reduce costly mistakes.
Beyond individual impact, cognitive fatigue affects team performance. A fatigued manager might overlook team input, stifling collaboration, while rested leaders sustain engagement. Implementing fatigue countermeasures—rotating high-demand tasks, encouraging micro-breaks—optimizes collective cognition. This application of neuropsychology in business ensures that high-stakes decisions, from budget approvals to crisis responses, retain sharpness, safeguarding organizational outcomes.
Risk Assessment: Neural Foundations of Uncertainty in Business
Risk assessment hinges on neural circuits balancing reward and threat. The ventral striatum anticipates gains, while the amygdala flags losses, creating a push-pull dynamic (Knutson & Greer, 2008). Uncertainty amplifies this—fMRI studies (e.g., Huettel et al., 2006) show increased insular activation when outcomes are unpredictable, driving aversion. A CFO evaluating an untested market weighs dopamine-driven optimism against amygdala-induced caution.
Individual differences shape risk tolerance. High dopamine baseline individuals favor bold moves, while amygdala sensitivity predicts conservatism (Cohen et al., 2009). Business applications include scenario planning to reduce uncertainty’s neural load, enhancing PFC oversight. Neuropsychology in business thus decodes risk’s biological roots, enabling leaders to calibrate decisions with precision under ambiguity.
This neural framework also informs strategic timing and team dynamics. Launching a risky initiative during low-stress periods leverages dopamine’s motivational boost, while high-stress contexts heighten loss aversion, stalling progress. Collaborative risk assessment—pooling diverse neural profiles—balances biases, refining outcomes. By aligning risk strategies with brain function, neuropsychology in business enhances foresight, turning uncertainty into a manageable variable.
Memory and Social Dynamics in Business Choices
Memory and social interactions, mediated by distinct brain regions, shape business decisions, reflecting the relational and historical dimensions of neuropsychology in business. This section explores these influences.
Memory and Decisions: How the Hippocampus Shapes Choices
The hippocampus, a seahorse-shaped structure, encodes and retrieves memories, informing business decisions with past experience. It consolidates declarative memories—facts and events—allowing a manager to recall a supplier’s reliability or a campaign’s success (Squire & Zola-Morgan, 1991). Stress or fatigue disrupts hippocampal function, impairing recall and skewing choices (McEwen, 2017).
In practice, memory guides strategy. A leader avoiding a failed tactic leverages episodic memory, while semantic memory—general knowledge—supports market analysis. Neuroplasticity enhances this; training strengthens hippocampal connections, improving retention (Tulving, 2002). Neuropsychology in business thus harnesses memory to anchor decisions in evidence, reducing reliance on flawed intuition.
The hippocampus also influences long-term planning and team learning. A CEO drawing on past mergers to negotiate terms exemplifies how memory stabilizes strategy, while training programs embedding procedural recall—e.g., safety protocols—enhance collective competence. By fostering memory-rich environments—documentation, debriefs—businesses amplify this capacity, ensuring decisions build on historical insight, a key facet of neuropsychology in business.
Social Neuroscience: Brain Influences on Team Decisions
Social neuroscience examines how brain processes underpin group dynamics, critical for team decisions. Mirror neurons in the parietal cortex activate when observing others, fostering empathy and coordination (Rizzolatti & Craighero, 2004). The medial PFC evaluates social cues, as when a leader gauges team morale, while the temporoparietal junction infers intentions, aiding negotiation (Saxe & Kanwisher, 2003).
Team decisions reflect this interplay. Consensus-building engages social reward circuits—dopamine spikes with agreement—while conflict triggers amygdala stress (Berns et al., 2005). A study of collaborative tasks (e.g., Woolley et al., 2010) found collective intelligence correlates with social sensitivity, not IQ, highlighting neural roots. Neuropsychology in business leverages these insights—fostering trust, reducing friction—to optimize group outcomes.
This social framework extends to leadership and culture. A manager mirroring team enthusiasm boosts morale, while misreading cues risks discord. Structured team-building—shared goals, open forums—enhances mirror neuron activity, aligning individual efforts. By applying neuropsychology in business, organizations cultivate cohesive teams, ensuring decisions reflect shared understanding and mutual reinforcement.
Practical Applications: Neuropsychology in Action
Neuropsychology’s practical applications in business translate brain-based insights into actionable strategies, enhancing performance and engagement. This section focuses on neuromarketing while integrating prior topics.
Neuromarketing: Brain Responses to Consumer Preferences
Neuromarketing uses neuroscience to decode consumer preferences, measuring brain responses to marketing stimuli. EEG and fMRI reveal how ads activate the ventral striatum (reward) or amygdala (emotion), predicting purchase intent (Ariely & Berns, 2010). A campaign evoking nostalgia—hippocampal memory—outperforms generic pitches, as seen in studies of emotional branding (e.g., Lindstrom, 2005), where sales rose 15% with targeted cues.
Applications extend to product design and pricing. Dopamine-driven reward anticipation favors bundles, while PFC analysis tempers impulse buys with value perception. Stress influences timing—cortisol spikes reduce receptivity late in the day—guiding ad schedules (Plassmann et al., 2012). Neuroplasticity refines this; repeated exposure strengthens brand associations. By integrating social neuroscience (group trends) and risk assessment (purchase uncertainty), neuromarketing exemplifies neuropsychology in business, aligning offerings with neural drivers.
Broader applications include workforce optimization. Memory techniques from training, stress management for executives, and attention strategies for fatigue—drawn from earlier sections—enhance employee performance, mirroring neuromarketing’s consumer focus. Feedback loops refine both, while social dynamics ensure team buy-in. This holistic use of neuropsychology in business drives efficiency, loyalty, and innovation, embedding brain-based insights into every operational layer.
Conclusion
Neuropsychology in business decision-making illuminates the brain’s role in shaping choices, offering a powerful synthesis of science and practice within business psychology foundations. This article has demonstrated how neural mechanisms—from dopamine’s motivational pull to the hippocampus’s memory anchor—drive leadership, strategy, and consumer behavior. The amygdala and prefrontal cortex balance emotion with logic, while stress, fatigue, and uncertainty test neural resilience, mitigated by adaptive strategies like neuroplasticity. Social dynamics and neuromarketing extend these insights, enhancing team cohesion and market responsiveness.
These findings underscore neuropsychology’s transformative impact. By decoding reward systems, businesses sustain motivation; by managing cognitive fatigue, they sharpen high-stakes decisions. Risk assessment and intuition, grounded in neural circuits, refine uncertainty navigation, while memory and social neuroscience optimize experience and collaboration. Practical applications, notably neuromarketing, translate these into competitive advantages—precision in consumer targeting, resilience in leadership—demonstrating the actionable value of neuropsychology in business.
As organizations face complexity, neuropsychology in business aligns human capacity with strategic goals, reflecting broader trends toward data-driven, human-centric management. Its evergreen principles—rooted in brain function—equip leaders to adapt, innovate, and thrive, affirming its enduring relevance. This comprehensive resource bridges theory and action, empowering stakeholders to harness brain-based insights for sustained success across diverse business contexts.
References:
[1] Ariely, D., & Berns, G. S. (2010). Neuromarketing: The hope and hype of neuroimaging in business. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(4), 284-292.
[2] Arnsten, A. F. T. (2009). Stress signalling pathways that impair prefrontal cortex structure and function. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10(6), 410-422.
[3] Bechara, A., Damasio, H., & Damasio, A. R. (2000). Emotion, decision making and the orbitofrontal cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 10(3), 295-307.
[4] Berns, G. S., Chappelow, J., Zink, C. F., Pagnoni, G., Martin-Skurski, M. E., & Richards, J. (2005). Neurobiological correlates of social conformity and independence during mental rotation. Biological Psychiatry, 58(3), 245-253.
[5] Berridge, K. C., & Robinson, T. E. (2016). Liking, wanting, and the incentive-sensitization theory of addiction. American Psychologist, 71(8), 670-679.
[6] Boksem, M. A. S., & Tops, M. (2008). Mental fatigue: Costs and benefits. Brain Research Reviews, 59(1), 125-139.
[7] Cohen, M. X., Schoene-Bake, J.-C., Elger, C. E., & Weber, B. (2009). Connectivity-based segregation of the human striatum predicts personality characteristics. Nature Neuroscience, 12(1), 32-34.
[8] Condly, S. J., Clark, R. E., & Stolovitch, H. D. (2003). The effects of incentives on workplace performance: A meta-analytic review of research studies. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 16(3), 46-63.
[9] Craig, A. D. (2009). How do you feel—now? The anterior insula and human awareness. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10(1), 59-70.
[10] Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. Putnam.
[11] Danziger, S., Levav, J., & Avnaim-Pesso, L. (2011). Extraneous factors in judicial decisions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(17), 6889-6892.
[12] Davidson, R. J., Kabat-Zinn, J., Schumacher, J., Rosenkranz, M., Muller, D., Santorelli, S. F., … & Sheridan, J. F. (2003). Alterations in brain and immune function produced by mindfulness meditation. Psychosomatic Medicine, 65(4), 564-570.
[13] Draganski, B., Gaser, C., Busch, V., Schuierer, G., Bogdahn, U., & May, A. (2004). Neuroplasticity: Changes in grey matter induced by training. Nature, 427(6972), 311-312.
[14] Hagger, M. S., Wood, C., Stiff, C., & Chatzisarantis, N. L. D. (2010). Ego depletion and the strength model of self-control: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(4), 495-525.
[15] Hebb, D. O. (1949). The Organization of Behavior: A Neuropsychological Theory. Wiley.
[16] Herculano-Houzel, S. (2009). The human brain in numbers: A linearly scaled-up primate brain. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 3, 31.
[17] Hogarth, R. M. (2001). Educating Intuition. University of Chicago Press.
[18] Huettel, S. A., Stowe, C. J., Gordon, E. M., Warner, B. T., & Platt, M. L. (2006). Neural signatures of economic preferences for risk and ambiguity. Neuron, 49(5), 765-775.
[19] Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
[20] Klein, G. (1998). Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions. MIT Press.
[21] Knutson, B., & Greer, S. M. (2008). Anticipatory affect: Neural correlates and consequences for choice. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 363(1511), 3771-3786.
[22] Koechlin, E., & Hyafil, A. (2007). Anterior prefrontal function and the limits of human decision-making. Science, 318(5850), 594-598.
[23] LeDoux, J. E. (1996). The Emotional Brain: The Mysterious Underpinnings of Emotional Life. Simon & Schuster.
[24] Lieberman, M. D. (2007). Social cognitive neuroscience: A review of core processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 259-289.
[25] Lindstrom, M. (2005). Brand Sense: Build Powerful Brands through Touch, Taste, Smell, Sight, and Sound. Free Press.
[26] Liston, C., McEwen, B. S., & Casey, B. J. (2009). Psychosocial stress reversibly disrupts prefrontal processing and attentional control. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(3), 912-917.
[27] McEwen, B. S. (2017). Neurobiological and systemic effects of chronic stress. Chronic Stress, 1, 1-11.
[28] Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 24, 167-202.
[29] Pascual-Leone, A., Amedi, A., Fregni, F., & Merabet, L. B. (2005). The plastic human brain cortex. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 28, 377-401.
[30] Phelps, E. A. (2004). Human emotion and memory: Interactions of the amygdala and hippocampal complex. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 14(2), 198-202.
[31] Plassmann, H., Ramsøy, T. Z., & Milosavljevic, M. (2012). Branding the brain: A critical review and outlook. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(1), 18-36.
[32] Rizzolatti, G., & Craighero, L. (2004). The mirror-neuron system. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 27, 169-192.
[33] Saxe, R., & Kanwisher, N. (2003). People thinking about thinking people: The role of the temporo-parietal junction in “theory of mind.” NeuroImage, 19(4), 1835-1842.
[34] Schultz, W. (2016). Dopamine reward prediction-error signalling: A two-component response. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 17(3), 183-195.
[35] Squire, L. R., & Zola-Morgan, S. (1991). The medial temporal lobe memory system. Science, 253(5026), 1380-1386.
[36] Tang, Y.-Y., Hölzel, B. K., & Posner, M. I. (2015). The neuroscience of mindfulness meditation. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 16(4), 213-225.
[37] Tulving, E. (2002). Episodic memory: From mind to brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 1-25.
[38] Woolley, A. W., Chabris, C. F., Pentland, A., Hashmi, N., & Malone, T. W. (2010). Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science, 330(6004), 686-688.