Behavioural data, skin-conductance data, eye movement data, and R scripts (analyses) for eight behavioural experiments.Dataset relating to 'How does response inhibition influence decision-making when gambling?’research paper published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. The paper is available in ORE: http://hdl.handle.net/10871/15841Behavioural data, skin-conductance data, eye movement data, and R scripts (analyses) for eight behavioural experiments. Experiment documentation is included as well.​ This data is related to the article 'How does response inhibition influence decision-making when gambling?' published in Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied.Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)European Research Council (ERC)Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC)British Academy/Leverhulme Gran

Aureliu Lavric

Christopher D. Chambers

Damien Brevers

Frederick Verbruggen

Ian P. L. Mclaren

Myriam Mertens

Tobias Stevens

Université Libre De Bruxelles

Xavier Noël

Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied

PubMed

Recent research suggests that response inhibition training can alter impulsive and compulsive behavior.

When stop signals are introduced in a gambling task, people not only become more cautious when

executing their choice responses, they also prefer lower bets when gambling. Here, we examined how

stopping motor responses influences gambling. Experiment 1 showed that the reduced betting in

stop-signal blocks was not caused by changes in information sampling styles or changes in arousal. In

Experiments 2a and 2b, people preferred lower bets when they occasionally had to stop their response

in a secondary decision-making task but not when they were instructed to respond as accurately as

possible. Experiment 3 showed that merely introducing trials on which subjects could not gamble did not

influence gambling preferences. Experiment 4 demonstrated that the effect of stopping on gambling

generalized to different populations. Further, 2 combined analyses suggested that the effect of stopping

on gambling preferences was reliable but small. Finally, Experiment 5 showed that the effect of stopping

on gambling generalized to a different task. On the basis of our findings and earlier research, we propose

that the presence of stop signals influences gambling by reducing approach behavior and altering the

motivational value of the gambling outcome

Stevens, Tobias

Brevers, Damien

Chambers, Christopher D.

Lavric, Aureliu

McLaren, Ian P. L.

Mertens, Myriam

Noël, Xavier

Verbruggen, Frederick

Online Research @ Cardiff

How does response inhibition influence decision making when gambling?

Ian P. L. McLaren

Crossref

Recent research suggests that response inhibition training can alter impulsive and compulsive behavior. When stop signals are introduced in a gambling task, people not only become more cautious when executing their choice responses, they also prefer lower bets when gambling. Here, we examined how stopping motor responses influences gambling. Experiment 1 showed that the reduced betting in stop-signal blocks was not caused by changes in information sampling styles or changes in arousal. In Experiments 2a and 2b, people preferred lower bets when they occasionally had to stop their response in a secondary decision-making task but not when they were instructed to respond as accurately as possible. Experiment 3 showed that merely introducing trials on which subjects could not gamble did not influence gambling preferences. Experiment 4 demonstrated that the effect of stopping on gambling generalized to different populations. Further, 2 combined analyses suggested that the effect of stopping on gambling preferences was reliable but small. Finally, Experiment 5 showed that the effect of stopping on gambling generalized to a different task. On the basis of our findings and earlier research, we propose that the presence of stop signals influences gambling by reducing approach behavior and altering the motivational value of the gambling outcome

Noel, Xavier

Ghent University Academic Bibliography

Chambers, Christopher D

McLaren, Ian P L

DIAL UCLouvain

McLaren, Ian P.L.

Open Research Exeter

How does response inhibition influence decision-making when gambling? (dataset)

This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of recordRelated dataset available in ORE at: http://hdl.handle.net/10871/15733 (see link above)Recent research suggests that response-inhibition training can alter impulsive and compulsive behaviour. When stop signals are introduced in a gambling task, people not only become more cautious when executing their choice responses, they also prefer lower bets when gambling. Here we examined how stopping motor responses influences gambling. Experiment 1 showed that the reduced betting in stop-signal blocks was not caused by changes in information sampling styles or changes in arousal. In Experiments 2a-2b, people preferred lower bets when they occasionally had to stop their response in a secondary decision-making task, but not when they were instructed to respond as accurately as possible. Experiment 3 showed that merely introducing trials on which subjects could not gamble did not influence gambling preferences. Experiment 4 demonstrated that the effect of stopping on gambling generalised to different populations. Furthermore, two combined analyses suggest that the effect of stopping on gambling preferences was reliable but small. Finally, Experiment 5 showed that the effect of stopping on gambling generalised to a different task. Based on our findings and earlier research we propose that the presence of stop signals influences gambling by reducing approach behaviour and altering the motivational value of the gambling outcome

How does response inhibition influence decision-making when gambling?

Recent research suggests that response inhibition training can alter impulsive and compulsive behavior. When stop signals are introduced in a gambling task, people not only become more cautious when executing their choice responses, they also prefer lower bets when gambling. Here, we examined how stopping motor responses influences gambling. Experiment 1 showed that the reduced betting in stop-signal blocks was not caused by changes in information sampling styles or changes in arousal. In Experiments 2a and 2b, people preferred lower bets when they occasionally had to stop their response in a secondary decision-making task but not when they were instructed to respond as accurately as possible. Experiment 3 showed that merely introducing trials on which subjects could not gamble did not influence gambling preferences. Experiment 4 demonstrated that the effect of stopping on gambling generalized to different populations. Further, 2 combined analyses suggested that the effect of stopping on gambling preferences was reliable but small. Finally, Experiment 5 showed that the effect of stopping on gambling generalized to a different task. On the basis of our findings and earlier research, we propose that the presence of stop signals influences gambling by reducing approach behavior and altering the motivational value of the gambling outcome. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Chambers, Chris

McLaren, Ian IP

DI-fusion

How Does Response Inhibition Influence Decision Making When Gambling?

How does response inhibition influence decision-making when gambling? (dataset)

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Online Research @ Cardiff

Crossref

Ghent University Academic Bibliography

DIAL UCLouvain

Open Research Exeter

Open Research Exeter

DI-fusion