The Harvard Working Knowledge group recently posted this question and asked the greater community to answer it with the following executive summary:

The growing use of MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) devices for studying decision making means that in 2007 we may hear a number of striking conclusions based on studies involving a small number of brain scans, says Jim Heskett. What are the more general implications of this trend? Will it have strong explanatory as well as manipulative potential for us as consumers, managers, and citizens?

"Neuro economics is here to stay, according to a majority of those responding to this month's column. Its promises are too great to ignore. But it may be too early to know whether the promises will be realized in practice. And in the meantime, we stand warned against the hype that will be associated with findings based on research in need of standards and more fully-developed methods….

Among questions this leaves us with are whether this research is valuable primarily in the aggregate or in individual cases. If so, just how long will it take for practical results? And will the early "wins" be sufficiently significant to foster longer term development in the field? Is it too early to tell? What do you think?"

Practical results are already emerging from neuroeconomic research as cutting edge neuroscience trained investors begin to leverage neurofinancial techniques to improve investment performance. As David Darst, chief investment strategist for the $700 billion individual investor group at New York-based Morgan Stanley, recently said, “One day, brain science may help money managers spot shifts in investor sentiment.” With trillions of dollars on the line each day, you can bet that the future is coming very fast.