RT journal article
T1 Decision Making Profile of Positive and Negative Anticipatory Skin Conductance Responders in an Unlimited-Time Version of the IGT
A1 Merchán Clavellino, Ana
A1 Salguero Alcañiz, María P.
A1 Barbosa, Fernando
A1 Alameda-Bailén, José Ramón
A2 Psicología
K1 decision– making
K1 iowa gambling task
K1 prospect valence learning model
K1 positive anticipatory skin conductance
K1 negative anticipatory skin conductance
AB Based on the somatic marker hypothesis (Damasio, 1994), many studies have examinedwhether or not physiological responses are “somatic markers” that implicitly guide thedecision making process. Vegetative or motor reactions that are produced by negativeor positive stimuli generate a series of somatic markers. So, when a similar stimuli isencountered in the future, these somatic marks will facilitate favorable decisions andinhibit the disadvantageous ones (Martínez-Selva et al., 2006). The most widely studiedphysiological responses, as indicators of these markers, are heart rate and the skinconductance response (Damasio, 1994; Bechara et al., 1996). The Iowa GamblingTask (IGT) has been the most widely used tool in this research. The common IGTprotocol for psychophysiological studies comprises limited inter-trial intervals, and doesnot distinguish participants as a function of relevant physiological traits, such as theanticipatory skin conductance response (aSCR). The objectives of this work were todetermine whether “somatic markers” guide the decision making process without timerestrictions 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 ofthe probabilistic Prospect Valence Learning (PVL) model in three versions: maximumlikelihood estimation (MLE), PVL-Delta and PVL-Decay simulations with HierarchicalBayesian analysis (HBA) for parameter estimation. The results show a significant groupeffect in gambling indices, with the aSCRC group presenting lower risk in the decisionmaking process than the aSCR􀀀 group. Significant differences were also observedin the Utility parameter of MLE-PVL, with the aSCR􀀀 group have low sensitivity tofeedback outcomes, than aSRCC group. However, data from the PVL simulations donot show significant group differences and, in both cases, the utility value denotes lowsensitivity to feedback outcomes.
PB FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
SN 1664-1078
YR 2019
FD 2019-10
LK http://hdl.handle.net/10498/21977
UL http://hdl.handle.net/10498/21977
LA eng
DS Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de Cádiz
RD 08-nov-2026