Individual differences in decision making: Drive and reward responsiveness affect strategic bargaining in economic games

BACKGROUND: In the growing body of literature on economic decision making, the main focus has typically been on explaining aggregate behavior, with little interest in individual differences despite considerable between-subject variability in decision responses. In this study, we were interested in asking to what degree individual differences in fundamental psychological processes can mediate economic decision-making behavior. METHODS: Specifically, we studied a personality dimension that may influence economic decision-making, the Behavioral Activation System, (BAS) which is composed of three components: Reward Responsiveness, Drive, and Fun Seeking. In order to assess economic decision making, we utilized two commonly-used tasks, the Ultimatum Game and Dictator Game. Individual differences in BAS were measured by completion of the BIS/BAS Scales, and correlations between the BAS scales and monetary offers made in the two tasks were computed. RESULTS: We found that higher scores on BAS Drive and on BAS Reward Responsiveness were associated with a pattern of higher offers on the Ultimatum Game, lower offers on the Dictator Game, and a correspondingly larger discrepancy between Ultimatum Game and Dictator Game offers. CONCLUSION: These findings are consistent with an interpretation that high scores on Drive and Reward Responsiveness are associated with a strategy that first seeks to maximize the likelihood of reward, and then to maximize the amount of reward. More generally, these results suggest that there are additional factors other than empathy, fairness and selfishness that contribute to strategic decision-making

Delay discounting of monetary gains and losses in adolescents with ADHD : contribution of delay aversion to choice

Adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are known to have stronger preferences for smaller immediate rewards over larger delayed rewards in delay discounting tasks than their peers, which has been argued to reflect delay aversion. Here, participants performed a delay discounting task with gains and losses. In this latter condition, participants were asked whether they were willing to wait in order to lose less money. Following the core assumption of the delay aversion model that individuals with ADHD have a general aversion to delay, one would predict adolescents with ADHD to avoid waiting in both conditions. Adolescents (12-17 years) with ADHD (n = 29) and controls (n = 28) made choices between smaller immediate and larger delayed gains, and between larger immediate and smaller delayed losses. All delays (5-25 s) and gains/losses (2-10 cents) were experienced. In addition to an area under the curve approach, a mixed-model analysis was conducted to disentangle the contributions of delay duration and immediate gain/delayed loss amount to choice. The ADHD group chose the immediate option more often than controls in the gain condition, but not in the loss condition. The contribution of delay duration to immediate choices was stronger for the ADHD group than the control group in the gain condition only. In addition, the ADHD group scored higher on self-reported delay aversion, and delay aversion was associated with delay sensitivity in the gain condition, but not in the loss condition. In sum, we found no clear evidence for a general aversion to delay in adolescents with ADHD

A pilot study of behavioral, physiological, and subjective responses to varying mental effort requirements in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Background: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is presumed to involve mental effort application difficulties. To test this assumption, we manipulated task difficulty and measured behavioral, as well as subjective and psychophysiological indices of effort. Methods: Fifteen adolescent ADHD boys and 16 controls performed two tasks. First, subjective estimates and behavioral and pupillary measures of effort were recorded across five levels of N-back task difficulties. Second, effort discounting was assessed. In the latter, participants made repeated choices between performing a difficult N-back task for a high reward versus an easier N-back task for a smaller reward. Results: Increasing task difficulty led to similar deteriorations in performance for both groups - although ADHD participants performed more poorly at all difficulty levels than controls. While ADHD and control participants rated the tasks equally difficult and discounted effort similarly, those with ADHD displayed slightly different pupil dilation patterns with increasing task difficulty. Conclusion: The behavioral results did not provide evidence for mental effort problems in adolescent boys with ADHD. The subtle physiological effects, however, suggest that adolescents with ADHD may allocate effort in a different way than controls

Stop Saying That It Is Wrong! : Psychophysiological, Cognitive, and Metacognitive Markers of Children’s Sensitivity to Punishment

Neurodevelopmental evidence suggests that children’s main decision-making strategy is to avoid options likely to induce punishment. However, the cognitive and affective factors contributing to children’s avoidance to high punishment frequency remain unknown. The present study explored psychophysiological, cognitive, and metacognitive processes associated with sensitivity to punishment frequency. We evaluated 54 participants (between 8 and 15 years old) with a modified Iowa Gambling Task for children (IGT-C) which included options with varying long-term profit and punishment frequencies. Skin conductance responses (SCRs) were recorded during this task. Additionally, we assessed IGT-C metacognitive knowledge, fluid intelligence, and executive functions. Participants exhibited behavioral avoidance and high anticipatory SCRs to options with high frequency of punishment. Moreover, age, IGT-C metacognitive knowledge, and inhibitory control were associated with individual differences in sensitivity to punishment frequency. Our results suggest that children’s preference for infrequently punished decisions is partially explained by psychophysiological signals as well as task complexity and development of cognitive control.Facultad de Psicologí

A Pilot Study of Behavioral, Physiological, and Subjective Responses to Varying Mental Effort Requirements in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Background: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is presumed to involve mental effort application difficulties. To test this assumption, we manipulated task difficulty and measured behavioral, as well as subjective and psychophysiological indices of effort.Methods: Fifteen adolescent ADHD boys and 16 controls performed two tasks. First, subjective estimates and behavioral and pupillary measures of effort were recorded across five levels of N-back task difficulties. Second, effort discounting was assessed. In the latter, participants made repeated choices between performing a difficult N-back task for a high reward versus an easier N-back task for a smaller reward.Results: Increasing task difficulty led to similar deteriorations in performance for both groups – although ADHD participants performed more poorly at all difficulty levels than controls. While ADHD and control participants rated the tasks equally difficult and discounted effort similarly, those with ADHD displayed slightly different pupil dilation patterns with increasing task difficulty.Conclusion: The behavioral results did not provide evidence for mental effort problems in adolescent boys with ADHD. The subtle physiological effects, however, suggest that adolescents with ADHD may allocate effort in a different way than controls

The World Federation of ADHD International Consensus Statement:208 Evidence-based conclusions about the disorder

Background: Misconceptions about ADHD stigmatize affected people, reduce credibility of providers, and prevent/delay treatment. To challenge misconceptions, we curated findings with strong evidence base. Methods: We reviewed studies with more than 2000 participants or meta-analyses from five or more studies or 2000 or more participants. We excluded meta-analyses that did not assess publication bias, except for meta-analyses of prevalence. For network meta-analyses we required comparison adjusted funnel plots. We excluded treatment studies with waiting-list or treatment as usual controls. From this literature, we extracted evidence-based assertions about the disorder. Results: We generated 208 empirically supported statements about ADHD. The status of the included statements as empirically supported is approved by 80 authors from 27 countries and 6 continents. The contents of the manuscript are endorsed by 366 people who have read this document and agree with its contents. Conclusions: Many findings in ADHD are supported by meta-analysis. These allow for firm statements about the nature, course, outcome causes, and treatments for disorders that are useful for reducing misconceptions and stigma.</p