Cognitive chicken or the emotional egg? How reconceptualizing decision-making by integrating cognition and emotion can improve task psychometrics and clinical utility

Decision-making is an executive function, tapping into cognitive, emotional, and personality-based components. This complexity, and the varying operational definitions of the construct, is reflected in the rich array of behavioral decision-making tasks available for use in research and clinical settings. In many cases, these tasks are “subfield-specific,” with tasks developed by cognitive psychologists focusing on cognitive aspects of decision-making and tasks developed by clinical psychologists focusing on interactions between emotional and cognitive aspects. Critically, performance across different tasks does not consistently correlate, obfuscating the ability to compare scores between measures and detect changes over time. Differing theories as to what cognitive and/or emotional aspects affect decision-making likely contribute to this lack of consistency across measures. The low criterion-related validity among decision-making tasks and lack of consistent measurement of the construct presents challenges for emotion and decision-making scholars. In this perspective, we provide several recommendations for the field: (a) assess decision-making as a specific cognitive ability versus a taxonomy of cognitive abilities; (b) a renewed focus on convergent validity across tasks; (c) further assessment of test–retest reliability versus practice effects on tasks; and (d) reimagine future decision-making research to consider the research versus clinical implications. We discuss one example of decision-making research applied to clinical settings, acquired brain injury recovery, to demonstrate how some of these concerns and recommendations can affect the ability to track changes in decision-making across time

The true self online: personality correlates of preference for self-expression online, and observer ratings of personality online and offline

Theorists have suggested some people find it easier to express their “true selves” online than in person. Among 523 participants in an online study, Shyness was positively associated with online ‘Real Me’ self location, while Conscientiousness was negatively associated with an online self. Extraversion was indirectly negatively associated with an online self, mediated by Shyness. Neuroticism was positively associated with an online self, partly mediated by Shyness. 107 online and offline friends of participants provided ratings of them. Overall, both primary participants and their observers indicated that offline relationships were closer. However, participants who located their Real Me online reported feeling closer to their online friends than did those locating their real selves offline. To test whether personality is better expressed in online or offline interactions, observers’ ratings of participants’ personalities were compared. Both online and offline observers’ ratings of Extraversion, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness correlated with participants’ self-reports. However, only offline observers’ ratings of Neuroticism correlated with participants’ own. Except for Neuroticism, the similarity of online and offline observers’ personality ratings to participants’ self-reports did not differ significantly. The study provides no evidence that online self-presentations are more authentic; indeed Neuroticism may be more visibly expressed offline

Bradley M. Okdie's Quick Files

The Quick Files feature was discontinued and it’s files were migrated into this Project on March 11, 2022. The file URL’s will still resolve properly, and the Quick Files logs are available in the Project’s Recent Activity

Can Burdensome Facebook “Friends” Cause You Pain? Pain as a Motivation for Exclusion

This page hosts supplemental material for the manuscript entitled "Can Burdensome Facebook “Friends” Cause You Pain? Pain as a Motivation for Exclusion.

Seeing the forest through the trees: improving decision making on the Iowa gambling task by shifting focus from short- to long-term outcomes

Introduction: The present study sought to examine two methods by which to improve decision making on the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT): inducing a negative mood and providing additional learning trials. Method: In the first study, 194 undergraduate students (74 male; Mage = 19.44 [SD = 3.69]) were randomly assigned to view a series of pictures to induce a positive, negative, or neutral mood immediately prior to the IGT. In the second study, 276 undergraduate students (111 male; Mage = 19.18 [SD = 2.58]) completed a delay discounting task and back-to-back administrations of the IGT. Results: Participants in an induced negative mood selected more from Deck C during the final trials than those in an induced positive mood. Providing additional learning trials resulted in better decision making: participants shifted their focus from the frequency of immediate gains/losses (i.e., a preference for Decks B and D) to long-term outcomes (i.e., a preference for Deck D). In addition, disadvantageous decision making on the additional learning trials was associated with larger delay discounting (i.e., a preference for more immediate but smaller rewards). Conclusions: The present results indicate that decision making is affected by negative mood state, and that decision making can be improved by increasing the number of learning trials. In addition, the current results provide evidence of a relationship between performance on the IGT and on a separate measure of decision making, the delay discounting task. Moreover, the present results indicate that improved decision making on the IGT can be attributed to shifting focus towards long-term outcomes, as evidenced by increased selections from advantageous decks as well as correlations between the IGT and delay discounting task. Implications for the assessment of decision making using the IGT are discussed

It’s all in how you think about it: Construal level and the Iowa gambling task

Recent research has identified a number of factors that can influence performance on the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) when it is used in clinical or research settings. The current studies examine the effects of construal level theory (CLT) on the IGT. Study 1 suggests that when primed with a high construal mindset (i.e., thinking abstractly versus concretely), individuals learned to avoid Deck A more than those primed with a low construal mindset. Study 2 suggests that when construal level is manipulated through psychological distance (i.e., selecting for a close versus distant friend), individuals in a high construal mindset instead showed a preference for Deck A compared to individuals in a low construal mindset or a control group. Taken together, these studies suggest that IGT performance is impacted by the manner in which one construes the task. Implications for decision making research and use of the IGT as a clinical and research instrument are discussed

“I Hate To Be a Burden!”: Experiencing Feelings Associated With Ostracism Due to One\u27s Poor Performance Burdening the Group

We examined if perceiving oneself as burdensome, due to performing poorly in a group, can lead to feelings associated with ostracism (being excluded and ignored), without actually being ostracized. Participants completed a typing game (Study 1) or solved Remote Associates Test (Study 2) items where they performed worse, equal, or better than the group. To isolate the influence of burdensomeness, participants were consistently selected by computerized agents to play. In each study, worse performers experienced greater perceptions of being burdensome, less basic need satisfaction, increased negative mood, and greater anticipation of being excluded from a future group task compared to equal or better performers. Additionally, despite reporting being included, poor performers experienced social pain. These results suggest that although feeling burdensome can lead to outcomes related to ostracism, feeling burdensome is a distinct experience. Consequently, feeling burdensome may be one of many aversive social experiences leading to decreased social well-being

“I Hate To Be a Burden!”: Experiencing Feelings Associated With Ostracism Due to One\u27s Poor Performance Burdening the Group

We examined if perceiving oneself as burdensome, due to performing poorly in a group, can lead to feelings associated with ostracism (being excluded and ignored), without actually being ostracized. Participants completed a typing game (Study 1) or solved Remote Associates Test (Study 2) items where they performed worse, equal, or better than the group. To isolate the influence of burdensomeness, participants were consistently selected by computerized agents to play. In each study, worse performers experienced greater perceptions of being burdensome, less basic need satisfaction, increased negative mood, and greater anticipation of being excluded from a future group task compared to equal or better performers. Additionally, despite reporting being included, poor performers experienced social pain. These results suggest that although feeling burdensome can lead to outcomes related to ostracism, feeling burdensome is a distinct experience. Consequently, feeling burdensome may be one of many aversive social experiences leading to decreased social well-being