Cited by 117Philosophy and Theoretical ScienceNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFree Will and Agency

The biological function of consciousness

Open access
Earl, Brian·2014·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

This research is an investigation of whether consciousness-one's ongoing experience-influences one's behavior and, if so, how. Analysis of the components, structure, properties, and temporal sequences of consciousness has established that, (1) contrary to one's intuitive understanding, consciousness does not have an active, executive role in determining behavior; (2) consciousness does have a biological function; and (3) consciousness is solely information in various forms. Consciousness is associated with a flexible response mechanism (FRM) for decision-making, planning, and generally responding in nonautomatic ways. The FRM generates responses by manipulating information and, to function effectively, its data input must be restricted to task-relevant information. The properties of consciousness correspond to the various input requirements of the FRM; and when important information is missing from consciousness, functions of the FRM are adversely affected; both of which indicate that consciousness is the input data to the FRM. Qualitative and quantitative information (shape, size, location, etc.) are incorporated into the input data by a qualia array of colors, sounds, and so on, which makes the input conscious. This view of the biological function of consciousness provides an explanation why we have experiences; why we have emotional and other feelings, and why their loss is associated with poor decision-making; why blindsight patients do not spontaneously initiate responses to events in their blind field; why counter-habitual actions are only possible when the intended action is in mind; and the reason for inattentional blindness.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00697

Cites

183 of 183 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. Goodale M. A. Milner D. A. (2004). Sight Unseen. New York, NY: Oxford University Press
  2. Gouras P. (1991). The history of colour vision, in The Perception of Colour: Vision and Visual Dysfunction, Vol. 6, ed Gouras P. (London: MacMillan), 1– 9
  3. Jouvert M. (1999). The Paradox of Sleep. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (Trans. by Garey L. of Le sommeil et le rêve, 1993, Odile Jacob.)
  4. Libet B. (2004). Mind Time. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
  5. Raven P. H. Johnson G. B. (1992). Biology, 3rd Edn. St. Louis, MO: Mosby-Year
  6. Reason J. T. (1979). Actions not as planned: the price of automatization, in Aspects of Consciousness: Vol. 1, Psychological Issues, eds Underwood G. Stevens R. (London: Academic Press), 67– 89
  7. Rossetti Y. Pisella L. (2002). Several ‘vision for action’ systems: a guide to dissociating and integrating dorsal and ventral functions: a tutorial, in Common Mechanisms in Perception and Action: Attention and Performance XIX, eds Prinz W. Hommel B. (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 62– 119
  8. Schwarz N. (2002). Feelings as information: moods influence judgements and processing strategies, in Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgement, eds Gilovich T. Griffin D. Kahneman D. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 534– 547
  9. Seth A. K. (2009). Functions of consciousness, in Encyclopedia of Consciousness, ed Banks W. P. (Amsterdam: Elsevier/Academic Press), 279– 293
  10. Tesser A. Martin L. (1996). The psychology of evaluation, in Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles, eds Higgins E. T. Kruglanski A. W. (New York, NY: Guilford Press), 400– 432
  11. Thompson E. (1995). Colour Vision: A Study in Cognitive Science and the Philosophy of Perception. London: Routledge
  12. Tye M. (1995). Ten Problems of Consciousness: A Representational Theory of the Phenomenal Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  13. Velmans M. (2009). Understanding Consciousness, 2nd Edn. Hove: Routledge

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Earl, B.
Affiliations
Monash University (AU)
Corresponding author
Earl, Brian
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2014-08-05
Volume
5
Pages
697-697
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2070159864
Cited by
117
References
183
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
1.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Monash University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
Keywords
consciousness, subjective experience, decision-making, planning, qualia, task-relevant information, blindsight, inattentional blindness, emotions and decision-making

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review