The amygdala is a brain structure involved in emotion processing and which is especially reactive to threat stimuli.  Sensitivity to threat is a good thing. It means sensitivity to the possibility of danger or risk. Researchers and science writers often seem to assume that a strong neural response to threat implies something is wrong with a person’s state or personality – that they’re anxious, fearful, or neurotic – but that is not necessarily the case. For instance, the authors of one study noted that although brain scans of conservative subjects registered increased neural reactivity to threat, these subjects did not report greater anxiety in threat conditions. In other words, brain reactivity to threat does not automatically translate to felt anxiety.

There is other evidence that one can be risk-sensitive and relatively unstressed at the same time. Take business owners, for whom sensitivity to risk is an essential job requirement. Yet personality studies have shown business owners to be rather emotionally resilient: risk tolerant, stress tolerant, adaptable, and tolerant of financial insecurity. Business owners also tend to be conservative and decades of personality research have not uncovered a link between conservatism and anxiety.

Furthermore, effective decision-making depends on sensitivity to threat. No surprise, then, that the amygdala plays an essential role in decision-making, mostly by emotionally “weighing” possible choices in the decision process. One can’t make wise decisions without the amygdala’s input. That’s why I want the amygdalae of our politicians and government bureaucrats to be robust, active, and well-connected to the hard-thinking parts of their brains. When formulating or implementing policies, I want them to ask questions like:

·         What could go wrong with this policy?

·         What are the opportunity costs of this policy?

·         Are the costs worth the benefits?

·         What are the trade-offs?

·         What might be unintended consequences?

·         What alternative ways could achieve a similar or the same policy goal?

·         How reversible is the policy?

·         What is the back-up plan?

The capacity to imagine future danger and take constructive steps to avert it is called “adaptive anticipation”. Adaptive adaptation starts with sensitivity to threat. It ends with effective problem solving.

Note: This post is an updated and revised version of Blame It On Their Brains: Using Neuroscience To Explain Conservatives

References:

Elliott, R., C. D. Frith, et al. (1997). "Differential neural response to positive and negative feedback in planning and guessing tasks." Neuropsychologia 35(10): 1395-1404. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(97)00055-9

Floresco, S.B. and Ghods-Sharifi, S. (2007) “Amygdala-Prefrontal Cortical Circuitry Regulates Effort-Based Decision Making, Cerebral Cortex”. 17(2), 251–260, https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhj143

Grupe, D. W., & Nitschke, J. B. (2013). “Uncertainty and anticipation in anxiety: an integrated neurobiological and psychological perspective”. Nature reviews. Neuroscience, 14(7), 488-501. doi: 10.1038/nrn3524

Gupta, R., T. R. Koscik, et al. (2011). "The amygdala and decision-making." Neuropsychologia 49(4): 760-766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.09.029

Kanai, R., T. Feilden, et al. (2011). "Political Orientations Are Correlated with Brain Structure in Young Adults." Current Biology 21(8): 677-680. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2011.03.017

Hugh Courtney Jane Kirkland and Patrick Viguerie  Strategy Under Uncertainty Harvard Business Review November–December 1997 Issue

Joseph E LeDoux The Amygdala Is NOT the Brain's Fear Center: Separating findings from conclusions Psychology Today August 10, 2015 

Malone, J. C., Cohen, S., Liu, S. R., Vaillant, G. E., & Waldinger, R. J. (2013). “Adaptive midlife defense mechanisms and late-life health. Personality and individual differences”. 55(2), 85-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.01.025

Hibbing J.R., Smith K.B., Alford J.R. (2014). Differences in negativity bias underlie variations in political ideology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 37(3), 297–307.http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X13001192

Owens, K. S., Kirwan, J. R., Lounsbury, J. W., Levy, J. J., & Gibson, L. W. (2013). Personality correlates of self-employed small business owners’ success. Work: Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation, 45(1), 73-85. DOI: 10.3233/WOR-121536

Pedersen, W. S., Muftuler, L. T., & Larson, C. L. (2017). Conservatism and the neural circuitry of threat: economic conservatism predicts greater amygdala-BNST connectivity during periods of threat vs safety. Social cognitive and affective neuroscience, 13(1), 43-51. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsx133

Phelps, E. A. and A. K. Anderson (1997). "Emotional memory: What does the amygdala do?" Current Biology 7(5): R311-R314. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-9822(06)00146-1

Rauch, A &  Frese, M (2007) “Let's put the person back into entrepreneurship research: A meta-analysis on the relationship between business owners' personality traits, business creation, and success”, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 16:4, 353-385, DOI: 10.1080/13594320701595438

Schlund, Michael W et al. “Nothing to fear? Neural systems supporting avoidance behavior in healthy youths” NeuroImage vol. 52,2 (2010): 710-9. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.04.244

Seymour, B. and R. Dolan (2008). "Emotion, Decision Making, and the Amygdala." Neuron 58(5): 662-671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2008.05.020

Vaillant, G. E. (2000). “Adaptive mental mechanisms: Their role in a positive psychology”. American Psychologist, 55(1), 89-98.  http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.89