Heterogeneity in choices on Iowa Gambling Task: preference for infrequent–high magnitude punishment [Book Review]
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Mind and Society 8 (1):43-57 (2009)
Reward attribute, i.e. long-term versus short-term reward, is the most commonly analyzed choice attribute in Iowa Gambling Task . The present study employs measures of individual differences to explore preferences in IGT choices, based on punishment attribute along with the reward attribute. Three questionnaires were employed to analyze whether preferences were based on reward or on punishment attribute of the IGT choices. The T test indicated a selective preference for punishment, but not for reward attribute. Pearson’s correlation revealed that rational information processing is associated with more choices from infrequent–large punishment decks. Regression analysis indicated that rational information processing, tendency to maximize-experience regret, and risk attitude accounted for selective preferences based on the punishment attribute. Measures employed were unrelated to reward attribute of the IGT choices. Results are explained in terms of choice preference for frequent but smaller magnitude versus infrequent but larger magnitude punishment in IGT
|Keywords||Decision-making Individual differences Information processing Iowa Gambling Task Reward-punishment|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
A. Bechara, A. R. Damasio, H. Damasio & S. W. Anderson (1993). Insensitivity to Future Consequences Following Damage to Human Prefrontal Cortex. Cognition 50 (1-3):7-15.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Elwin Myers (2010). Influence of Economic Reward and Punishment on Unethical Behavior. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 29 (1/4):155-174.
A. N. M. Waheeduzzaman & Elwin Myers (2010). Influence of Economic Reward and Punishment on Unethical Behavior. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 29 (1-4):155-174.
Christian P. Janssen & Wayne D. Gray (2012). When, What, and How Much to Reward in Reinforcement Learning-Based Models of Cognition. Cognitive Science 36 (2):333-358.
Sven Ove Hansson (2009). Preference-Based Choice Functions: A Generalized Approach. Synthese 171 (2):257 - 269.
Edmund T. Rolls (2000). Précis of the Brain and Emotion. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (2):177-191.
Philip Gerrans (2007). Mental Time Travel, Somatic Markers and "Myopia for the Future". Synthese 159 (3):459 - 474.
Ross Buck (2000). Conceptualizing Motivation and Emotion. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (2):195-196.
Franz Dietrich & Christian List (2013). A Reason-Based Theory of Rational Choice. Noûs 47 (1):104-134.
Jordan Howard Sobel (1997). Cyclical Preferences and World Bayesianism. Philosophy of Science 64 (1):42-73.
Marcus Selart, Ole Boe & Tommy Garling (1999). Reasoning About Outcome Probabilities and Values in Preference Reversals. Thinking and Reasoning 5 (2):175 – 188.
Duncan MacIntosh (1991). Preference's Progress: Rational Self-Alteration and the Rationality of Morality. Dialogue 30 (1991):3-32.
Jeremy Bentham (2009). The Rationale of Punishment. Prometheus Books.
Laurence Sears (1932). Responsibility, its Development Through Punishment and Reward. New York, Columbia University Press.
David Wood (2010). Punishment: Consequentialism. Philosophy Compass 5 (6):455-469.
Added to index2010-09-14
Total downloads24 ( #160,520 of 1,907,521 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #159,567 of 1,907,521 )
How can I increase my downloads?