Decision Making Profile of Positive and Negative Anticipatory Skin Conductance Responders in an Unlimited-Time Version of the IGT

Files
Statistics
Metrics and citations
Share
Metadata
Show full item recordDate
2019-10Department
PsicologíaSource
Frontiers in Psychology 10:2237Abstract
Based on the somatic marker hypothesis (Damasio, 1994), many studies have examined
whether or not physiological responses are “somatic markers” that implicitly guide the
decision making process. Vegetative or motor reactions that are produced by negative
or positive stimuli generate a series of somatic markers. So, when a similar stimuli is
encountered in the future, these somatic marks will facilitate favorable decisions and
inhibit the disadvantageous ones (Martínez-Selva et al., 2006). The most widely studied
physiological responses, as indicators of these markers, are heart rate and the skin
conductance response (Damasio, 1994; Bechara et al., 1996). The Iowa Gambling
Task (IGT) has been the most widely used tool in this research. The common IGT
protocol for psychophysiological studies comprises limited inter-trial intervals, and does
not distinguish participants as a function of relevant physiological traits, such as the
anticipatory skin conductance response (aSCR). The objectives of this work were to
determine whether “somatic markers” guide the decision making process without time
restrictions and to examine the effects of opposite aSCR profiles on this process.
Participants were 29 healthy subjects, divided into two groups according to positive
(C) and negative () aSCR. Two different data analysis strategies were applied: firstly,
gambling indices were computed and, secondly, we examined the parameters of
the probabilistic Prospect Valence Learning (PVL) model in three versions: maximum
likelihood estimation (MLE), PVL-Delta and PVL-Decay simulations with Hierarchical
Bayesian analysis (HBA) for parameter estimation. The results show a significant group
effect in gambling indices, with the aSCRC group presenting lower risk in the decision
making process than the aSCR group. Significant differences were also observed
in the Utility parameter of MLE-PVL, with the aSCR group have low sensitivity to
feedback outcomes, than aSRCC group. However, data from the PVL simulations do
not show significant group differences and, in both cases, the utility value denotes low
sensitivity to feedback outcomes.
Subjects
decision– making; iowa gambling task; prospect valence learning model; positive anticipatory skin conductance; negative anticipatory skin conductanceCollections
- Artículos Científicos [4821]
- Articulos Científicos Didáctica [217]
- Artículos Científicos INDESS [384]