What makes us conscious?

March 16, 2016 by Matthew Davidson, Monash University, The Conversation
Consciousness might emerge from a particular kind of information processing. Credit: Shutterstock

Do you think that the machine you are reading this story on, right now, has a feeling of "what it is like" to be in its state?

What about a pet dog? Does it have a sense of what it's like to be in its state? It may pine for attention, and appear to have a unique subjective experience, but what separates the two cases?

These are by no means simple questions. How and why particular circumstances may give rise to our experience of consciousness remain some of the most puzzling questions of our time.

Newborn babies, -damaged patients, complicated machines and animals may display signs of consciousness. However, the extent or nature of their experience remains a hotbed of intellectual enquiry.

Being able to quantify consciousness would go a long way toward answering some of these problems. From a clinical perspective, any theory that might serve this purpose also needs to be able to account for why certain areas of the brain appear critical to consciousness, and why the damage or removal of other regions appears to have relatively little impact.

One such theory has been gaining support in the scientific community. It's called Integrated Information Theory (IIT), and was proposed in 2008 by Guilio Tononi, a US-based neuroscientist.

It also has one rather surprising implication: consciousness can, in principle, be found anywhere where there is the right kind of information processing going on, whether that's in a brain or a computer.

Information and consciousness

The theory says that a physical system can give rise to consciousness if two physical postulates are met.

The first is that the physical system must be very rich in information.

If a system is conscious of an enormous number of things, like every frame in a film, but if each frame is clearly distinct, then we'd say conscious experience is highly differentiated.

Both your brain and your hard drive are capable of containing such highly differentiated information. But one is conscious and the other is not.

So what is the difference between your hard drive and your brain? For one, the is also highly integrated. There are many billions of cross links between individual inputs that far exceed any (current) computer.

This brings us to the second postulate, which is that for consciousness to emerge, the physical system must also be highly integrated.

Whatever information you are conscious of is wholly and completely presented to your mind. For, try as you might, you are unable to segregate the frames of a film into a series of static images. Nor can you completely isolate the information you receive from each of your senses.

The implication is that integration is a measure of what differentiates our brains from other highly complex systems.

Integrated information and the brain

By borrowing from the language of mathematics, IIT attempts to generate a single number as a measure of this integrated information, known as phi (Φ, pronounced "fi").

Something with a low phi, such as a , won't be conscious. Whereas something with a high enough phi, like a mammalian brain, will be.

What makes phi interesting is that a number of its predictions can be empirically tested: if consciousness corresponds to the amount of integrated information in a system, then measures that approximate phi should differ during altered states of consciousness.

Recently, a team of researchers developed an instrument capable of measuring a related quantity to integrated information in the human brain, and tested this idea.

They used electromagnetic pulses to stimulate the brain, and were able to distinguish awake and anaesthetised brains from the complexity of the resulting neural activity.

The same measure was even capable of discriminating between brain injured patients in vegetative compared to minimally conscious states. It also increased when patients went from non-dream to the dream-filled states of sleep.

IIT also predicts why the cerebellum, an area at the rear of the human brain, seems to contribute only minimally to consciousness. This is despite it containing four times more neurons than the rest of the cerebral cortex, which appears to be the seat of consciousness.

The cerebellum has a comparatively simple crystalline arrangement of neurons. So IIT would suggest this area is information rich, or highly differentiated, but it fails IIT's second requirement of integration.

Although there's a lot more work to be done, some striking implications remain for this theory of consciousness.

If consciousness is indeed an emergent feature of a highly integrated network, as IIT suggests, then probably all complex systems – certainly all creatures with brains – have some minimal form of consciousness.

By extension, if consciousness is defined by the amount of integrated information in a system, then we may also need to move away from any form of human exceptionalism that says is exclusive to us.

Explore further: Brain study suggests consciousness a matter of optimal degree of connectedness in neural network

Related Stories

Brain study suggests consciousness a matter of optimal degree of connectedness in neural network

January 27, 2016
(Medical Xpress)—A team of European researchers has found evidence that suggests that human consciousness is a state where the neural network that makes up the brain operates at an optimal degree of connectedness. In their ...

At least two regions of the brain decide what we perceive

September 25, 2014
People have never been exposed to as many sensory stimuli as they are today. We do not, however, consciously perceive the majority of the sensory impressions that bombard us. Our brain processes these impressions without ...

Consciousness has less control than believed, according to new theory

June 23, 2015
Consciousness—the internal dialogue that seems to govern one's thoughts and actions—is far less powerful than people believe, serving as a passive conduit rather than an active force that exerts control, according to ...

Complex environments push 'brain' evolution

January 29, 2015
Little animations trying to master a computer game are teaching neuroscience researchers how the brain evolves when faced with difficult tasks.

Brain scans may help predict recovery from coma

November 11, 2015
Brain scans of people in a coma may help predict who will regain consciousness, according to a study published in the November 11, 2015, online issue of Neurology, the medical journal of the American Academy of Neurology. ...

Recommended for you

How a seahorse-shaped brain structure may help us recognize others

December 8, 2017
How do we recognize others? How do we know friend from foe, threat from reward? How does the brain compute the multitude of cues telling us that Susan is not Erica even though they look alike? The complexity of social interactions—human ...

Brain networks that help babies learn to walk ID'd

December 8, 2017
Scientists have identified brain networks involved in a baby's learning to walk—a discovery that eventually may help predict whether infants are at risk for autism.

Why we can't always stop what we've started

December 7, 2017
When we try to stop a body movement at the last second, perhaps to keep ourselves from stepping on what we just realized was ice, we can't always do it—and Johns Hopkins University neuroscientists have figured out why.

Mutations in neurons accumulate as we age: The process may explain normal cognitive decline and neurodegeneration

December 7, 2017
Scientists have wondered whether somatic (non-inherited) mutations play a role in aging and brain degeneration, but until recently there was no good technology to test this idea. A study published online today in Science, ...

Researchers launch atlas of developing human brain

December 7, 2017
The human brain has been called the most complex object in the cosmos, with 86 billion intricately interconnected neurons and an equivalent number of supportive glial cells. One of science's greatest mysteries is how an organ ...

How we learn: Mastering the features around you rather than learning about individual objects

December 7, 2017
A Dartmouth-led study on how we learn finds that humans tend to rely on learning about the features of an object, rather than on the individual object itself.

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.