Making assessments while taking repeated risks: A pattern of multiple response pathways

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Volumn 143, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 142-162

  Pleskac, Timothy J ^a   Wershbale, Avishai ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Conduct disorder; Dual process; Risk taking; Sequential risk taking; Sequential sampling model

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HIGH RISK BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; REACTION TIME; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ALGORITHMS; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; REACTION TIME; RISK-TAKING; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84893420871     PISSN: 00963445     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0031106     Document Type: Article

References (89)

1. Aklin, W. M., Lejuez, C. W., Zvolensky, M. J., Kahler, C. W., & Gwadz, M. (2005). Evaluation of behavioral measures of risk taking propensity with inner city adolescents. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 43, 215-228. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2003.12.007
2. American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text rev.). Washington, DC: Author.
3. Atkinson, R. C., Bower, G. H., & Crothers, E. J. (1965). An introduction to mathematical learning theory. New York, NY: Wiley.
4. Barkley, R. A. (1997). Behavioral inhibition, sustained attention, and executive functions: Constructing a unifying theory of ADHD. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 65-94. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.65
5. Barron, G., & Erev, I. (2003). Small feedback-based decisions and their limited correspondence to description-based decisions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 16, 215-233. doi:10.1002/bdm.443
6. Bechara, A., Damasio, A. R., Damasio, H., & Anderson, S. W. (1994). Insensitivity to future consequences following damage to human prefrontal cortex. Cognition, 50, 7-15. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(94)90018-3
7. Birnbaum, M. H. (1999). Testing critical properties of decision making on the Internet. Psychological Science, 10, 399-407. doi:10.1111/1467-9280 .00176
8. Bishara, A. J., Kruschke, J. K., Stout, J. C., Bechara, A., McCabe, D. P., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2010). Sequential learning models for the Wisconsin card sort task: Assessing processes in substance dependent individuals. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 54, 5-13. doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2008.10.002
9. Bornovalova, M. A., Daughters, S. B., Hernandez, G. D., Richards, J. B., & Lejuez, C. W. (2005). Differences in impulsivity and risk-taking propensity between primary users of crack cocaine and primary users of heroin in a residential substance-use program. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 13, 311-318. doi:10.1037/1064-1297.13.4.311
10. Bower, G. H. (1959). Choice point behavior. In R. R. Bush & W. K. Estes (Eds.), Studies in mathematical learning theory (pp. 109-124). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
11. Brandstätter, E., Gigerenzer, G., & Hertwig, R. (2006). The priority heuristic: Making choices without trade-offs. Psychological Review, 113, 409-432. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.113.2.409
12. Brown, S. D., & Heathcote, A. (2008). The simplest complete model of choice response time: Linear ballistic accumulation. Cognitive Psychology, 57, 153-178. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2007.12.002
13. Busemeyer, J. R., & Diederich, A. (2010). Cognitive modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14. Busemeyer, J. R., & Stout, J. C. (2002). A contribution of cognitive decision models to clinical assessment: Decomposing performance on the Bechara gambling task. Psychological Assessment, 14, 253-262. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.14.3.253
15. Busemeyer, J. R., & Townsend, J. T. (1993). Decision field theory: A dynamiccognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. Psychological Review, 100, 432-459. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.100.3.432
16. Crowley, T. J., Raymond, K. M., Mikulich-Gilbertson, S. K., Thompson, L. L., & Lejuez, C. W. (2006). A risk-taking "set" in a novel task among adolescents with serious conduct and substance problems. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 45, 175-183. doi:10.1097/01.chi.0000188893.60551.31
17. Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes' error. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
18. Daw, N. D., Niv, Y., & Dayan, P. (2005). Uncertainty-based competition between prefrontal and dorsolateral striatal systems for behavioral control. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 1704-1711. doi:10.1038/nn1560
19. Daw, N. D., O'Doherty, J. P., Dayan, P., Seymour, B., & Dolan, R. J. (2006). Cortical substrates for exploratory decisions in humans. Nature, 441, 876-879. doi:10.1038/nature04766
20. Denrell, J. (2007). Adaptive learning and risk taking. Psychological Review, 114, 177-187. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.114.1.177
21. Dickinson, A. (1985). Actions and habits: The development of behavioural autonomy. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society: B. Biological Sciences, 308, 67-78. doi:10.1098/rstb.1985.0010
22. Evans, J. S. B. T. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255-278. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629
23. Figner, B., Mackinlay, R. J., Wilkening, F., & Weber, E. U. (2009). Affective and deliberative processes in risky choice: Age differences in risk taking in the Columbia Card Task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 709-730. doi:10.1037/a0014983
24. Frank, M. J., & Claus, E. D. (2006). Anatomy of a decision: Striato-orbitofrontal interactions in reinforcement learning, decision making, and reversal. Psychological Review, 113, 300-326. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.113.2.300
25. Frank, M. J., Cohen, M. X., & Sanfey, A. G. (2009). Multiple systems in decision making: A neurocomputational perspective. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 73-77. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01612.x
26. Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., & Rubin, D. B. (2003). Bayesian data analysis (2nd ed.). Chapman & Hall/CRC.
27. Gigerenzer, G., & Regier, T. (1996). How do we tell an association from a rule? Comment on Sloman (1996). Psychological Bulletin, 119, 23-26. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.23
28. Gläscher, J., Daw, N., Dayan, P., & O'Doherty, J. P. (2010). States versus rewards: Dissociable neural prediction error signals underlying modelbased and model-free reinforcement learning. Neuron, 66, 585-595. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2010.04.016
29. Goss, A. E., & Wischner, G. J. (1956). Vicarious trial and error and related behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 35-54. doi:10.1037/h0045108
30. Hau, R., Pleskac, T. J., Kiefer, J., & Hertwig, R. (2008). The descriptionexperience gap in risky choice: The role of sample size and experienced probabilities. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 21, 493-518. doi:10.1002/bdm.598
31. Hoffrage, U., Weber, A., Hertwig, R., & Chase, V. M. (2003). How to keep children safe in traffic: Find the daredevils early. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 9, 249-260. doi:10.1037/1076-898X.9.4.249
32. Hohle, R. H. (1965). Inferred components of reaction-times as functions of foreperiod duration. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69, 382-386. doi:10.1037/h0021740
33. Hopko, D. R., Lejuez, C. W., Daughters, S. B., Aklin, W. M., Osborne, A., Simmons, B. L., & Strong, D. R. (2006). Construct validity of the balloon analogue risk task (BART): Relationship with MDMA use by inner-city drug users in residential treatment. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 28, 95-101. doi:10.1007/s10862-006-7487-5
34. Hu, D., & Amsel, A. (1995). A simple test of the vicarious trial-and-error hypothesis of hippocampal function. PNAS: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 92, 5506-5509. doi:10.1073/pnas.92.12.5506
35. Hu, D., Xu, X. J., & Gonzalez-Lima, F. (2006). Vicarious trial-and-error behavior and hippocampal cytochrome oxidase activity during Y-maze discrimination learning in the rat. International Journal of Neuroscience, 116, 265-280. doi:10.1080/00207450500403108
36. Jessup, R. K., Bishara, A. J., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2008). Feedback produces divergence from prospect theory in descriptive choice. Psychological Science, 19, 1015-1022. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02193.x
37. Johnson, A., van der Meer, M. A. A., & Redish, A. D. (2007). Integrating hippocampus and striatum in decision-making. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 17, 692-697. doi:10.1016/j.conb.2008.01.003
38. Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58, 697-720. doi:10.1037/ 0003-066X.58.9.697
39. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291. doi:10.2307/1914185
40. Keramati, M., Dezfouli, A., & Piray, P. (2011). Speed/accuracy trade-off between the habitual and the goal-directed processes. PLoS Computational Biology, 7, e1002055.
41. Keren, G., & Schul, Y. (2009). Two is not always better than one: A critical evaluation of two-system theories. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 533-550. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01164.x
42. Kruglanski, A. W., & Gigerenzer, G. (2011). Intuitive and deliberate judgments are based on common principles. Psychological Review, 118, 97-109. doi:10.1037/a0020762
43. Kruschke, J. K. (2010). Doing Bayesian data analysis: A tutorial with R and BUGS. Boston, MA: Academic Press.
44. Lacouture, Y., & Cousineau, D. (2008). How to use MATLAB to fit the ex-Gaussian and other probability functions to a distribution of response times. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 4, 35-45.
45. Lejuez, C. W., Aklin, W. M., Bornovalova, M. A., & Moolchan, E. T. (2005). Differences in risk-taking propensity across inner-city adolescent ever- and never-smokers. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 7, 71-79. doi:10.1080/14622200412331328484
46. Lejuez, C. W., Aklin, W. M., Jones, H. A., Richards, J. B., Strong, D. R., Kahler, C. W., & Read, J. P. (2003). The balloon analogue risk task (BART) differentiates smokers and nonsmokers. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 11, 26-33. doi:10.1037/1064- 1297.11.1.26
47. Lejuez, C. W., Aklin, W. M., Zvolensky, M. J., & Pedulla, C. M. (2003). Evaluation of the balloon analogue risk task (BART) as a predictor of adolescent real-world risk-taking behaviours. Journal of Adolescence, 26, 475-479. doi:10.1016/S0140-1971(03)00036-8
48. Lejuez, C. W., Read, J. P., Kahler, C. W., Richards, J. B., Ramsey, S. E., Stuart, G. L. . . . Brown, R. A. (2002). Evaluation of a behavioral measure of risk taking: The balloon analogue risk task (BART). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 75-84. doi:10.1037/1076- 898X.8.2.75
49. Lejuez, C. W., Simmons, B. L., Aklin, W. M., Daughters, S. B., & Dvir, S. (2004). Risk-taking propensity and risky sexual behavior of individuals in residential substance use treatment. Addictive Behaviors, 29, 1643-1647. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2004.02.035
50. Luce, R. D. (1986). Response times: Their role in inferring elementary mental organization. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
51. Moeller, F. G., Barratt, E. S., Dougherty, D. M., Schmitz, J. M., & Swann, A. C. (2001). Psychiatric aspects of impulsivity. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 158, 1783-1793. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp .158.11.1783
52. Muenzinger, K. F. (1938). Vicarious trial and error at a point of choice: I. A general survey of its relation to learning efficiency. Pedagogical Seminary and Journal of Genetic Psychology, 53, 75-86. doi:10.1080/ 08856559.1938.10533799
53. Mukherjee, K. (2010). A dual system model of preferences under risk. Psychological Review, 117, 243-255. doi:10.1037/a0017884
54. Nelder, J. A., & Mead, R. (1965). A simplex-method for function minimization. Computer Journal, 7, 308-313.
55. Nigg, J. T. (2000). On inhibition/disinhibition in developmental psychopathology: Views from cognitive and personality psychology and a working inhibition taxonomy. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 220-246. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.126.2.220
56. O'Doherty, J. P. (2004). Reward representations and reward-related learning in the human brain: Insights from neuroimaging. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 14, 769-776. doi:10.1016/j.conb.2004.10.016
57. Oosterlaan, J., Logan, G. D., & Sergeant, J. A. (1998). Response inhibition in AD/HD, CD, comorbid AD/HD+CD, anxious, and control children: A meta-analysis of studies with the stop task. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 39, 411-425. doi:10.1017/ S0021963097002072
58. Otto, A. R., Gershman, S. J., Markman, A. B., & Daw, N. D. (in press). The curse of planning: Dissecting multiple reinforcement learning systems by taxing the central executive. Psychological Science.
59. Pleskac, T. J. (2008). Decision making and learning while taking sequential risks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 167-185. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.34.1.167
60. Pleskac, T. J., Wallsten, T. S., Wang, P., & Lejuez, C. W. (2008). Development of an automatic response mode to improve the clinical utility of sequential risk-taking tasks. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 16, 555-564. doi:10.1037/a0014245
61. Quay, H. C. (1993). The psychobiology of undersocialized aggressive conduct disorder: A theoretical perspective. Development and Psychopathology, 5, 165-180. doi:10.1017/S0954579400004326
62. Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. In P. V. Marsden (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1995 (pp. 111-196). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
63. Ratcliff, R. (1979). Group reaction-time distributions and an analysis of distribution statistics. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 446-461. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.446
64. Ratcliff, R., & Murdock, B. B. (1976). Retrieval processes in recognition memory. Psychological Review, 83, 190-214. doi:10.1037/0033-295X .83.3.190
65. Ratcliff, R., & Smith, P. L. (2004). A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time. Psychological Review, 111, 333-367. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.111.2.333
66. Ratcliff, R., Thapar, A., Gomez, P., & McKoon, G. (2004). A diffusion model analysis of the effects of aging in the lexical-decision task. Psychology and Aging, 19, 278-289. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.19.2.278
67. Ratcliff, R., Thapar, A., & McKoon, G. (2001). The effects of aging on reaction time in a signal detection task. Psychology and Aging, 16, 323-341. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.16.2.323
68. Ratcliff, R., & Tuerlinckx, F. (2002). Estimating parameters of the diffusion model: Approaches to dealing with contaminant reaction times and parameter variability. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 438-481. doi:10.3758/BF03196302
69. Reyna, V. F. (2004). How people make decisions that involve risk: A dual-processes approach. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 60-66. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00275.x
70. Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime user's guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.
71. Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84, 1-66. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.84.1.1
72. Shapiro, S. K., Quay, H. C., Hogan, A. E., & Schwartz, K. P. (1988). Response perseveration and delayed responding in undersocialized aggressive conduct disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 97, 371-373. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.97.3.371
73. Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127-190. doi:10.1037/0033- 295X.84.2.127
74. Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 3-22. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.3
75. Slovic, P. (1966). Risk-taking in children: Age and sex differences. Child Development, 37, 169-176. doi:10.2307/1126437
76. Stanovich, K. E. (1999). Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
77. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 645-765. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00003435
78. Tolman, E. C. (1938). The determiners of behavior at a choice point. Psychological Review, 45, 1-41. doi:10.1037/h0062733
79. Tolman, E. C. (1948). Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological Review, 55, 189-208. doi:10.1037/h0061626
80. Townsend, J. T., & Ashby, F. G. (1983). Stochastic modeling of elementary psychological processes. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
81. Townsend, J. T., Fific, M., & Neufeld, R. W. J. (2007). Assessment of mental architecture in clinical/cognitive research. In T. A. Treat, R. R. Bootzin, & T. B. Baker (Eds.), Psychological clinical science: Papers in honor of Richard M. McFall (pp. 223-258). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
82. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297-323. doi:10.1007/BF00122574
83. Usher, M., & McClelland, J. L. (2004). Loss aversion and inhibition in dynamical models of multialternative choice. Psychological Review, 111, 757-769. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.111.3.757
84. Van Zandt, T. (2000). How to fit a response time distribution. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 424-465. doi:10.3758/BF03214357
85. Wagenmakers, E. J. (2007). A practical solution to the pervasive problems of p values. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 779-804. doi:10.3758/ BF03194105
86. Wallsten, T. S., Pleskac, T. J., & Lejuez, C. W. (2005). Modeling behavior in a clinically diagnostic sequential risk-taking task. Psychological Review, 112, 862-880. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.862
87. White, C. N., Ratcliff, R., Vasey, M. W., & McKoon, G. (2010). Using diffusion models to understand clinical disorders. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 54, 39-52. doi:10.1016/j.jmp.2010.01.004
88. Yechiam, E., Busemeyer, J. R., Stout, J. C., & Bechara, A. (2005). Using cognitive models to map relations between neuropsychological disorders and human decision-making deficits. Psychological Science, 16, 973-978. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01646.x
89. Yechiam, E., Goodnight, J., Bates, J. E., Busemeyer, J. R., Dodge, K. A., Pettit, G. S., & Newman, J. P. (2006). A formal cognitive model of the go/no-go discrimination task: Evaluation and implications. Psychological Assessment, 18, 239-249. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.18.3.239