Literature DB >> 28264981

Reason's Enemy Is Not Emotion: Engagement of Cognitive Control Networks Explains Biases in Gain/Loss Framing.

Rosa Li1,2, David V Smith3, John A Clithero4, Vinod Venkatraman5, R McKell Carter6,7, Scott A Huettel8,2,9,10.   

Abstract

In the classic gain/loss framing effect, describing a gamble as a potential gain or loss biases people to make risk-averse or risk-seeking decisions, respectively. The canonical explanation for this effect is that frames differentially modulate emotional processes, which in turn leads to irrational choice behavior. Here, we evaluate the source of framing biases by integrating functional magnetic resonance imaging data from 143 human participants performing a gain/loss framing task with meta-analytic data from >8000 neuroimaging studies. We found that activation during choices consistent with the framing effect were most correlated with activation associated with the resting or default brain, while activation during choices inconsistent with the framing effect was most correlated with the task-engaged brain. Our findings argue against the common interpretation of gain/loss framing as a competition between emotion and control. Instead, our study indicates that this effect results from differential cognitive engagement across decision frames.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT The biases frequently exhibited by human decision makers have often been attributed to the presence of emotion. Using a large fMRI sample and analysis of whole-brain networks defined with the meta-analytic tool Neurosynth, we find that neural activity during frame-biased decisions was more significantly associated with default behaviors (and the absence of executive control) than with emotion. These findings point to a role for neuroscience in shaping long-standing psychological theories in decision science.
Copyright © 2017 the authors 0270-6474/17/373588-11$15.00/0.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cognitive control; decision making; default mode; emotion; fMRI; neuroeconomics

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28264981      PMCID: PMC5373136          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3486-16.2017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  58 in total

1.  Improved optimization for the robust and accurate linear registration and motion correction of brain images.

Authors:  Mark Jenkinson; Peter Bannister; Michael Brady; Stephen Smith
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 2.  Heuristic decision making.

Authors:  Gerd Gigerenzer; Wolfgang Gaissmaier
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 24.137

Review 3.  Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL.

Authors:  Stephen M Smith; Mark Jenkinson; Mark W Woolrich; Christian F Beckmann; Timothy E J Behrens; Heidi Johansen-Berg; Peter R Bannister; Marilena De Luca; Ivana Drobnjak; David E Flitney; Rami K Niazy; James Saunders; John Vickers; Yongyue Zhang; Nicola De Stefano; J Michael Brady; Paul M Matthews
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  Bayesian analysis of neuroimaging data in FSL.

Authors:  Mark W Woolrich; Saad Jbabdi; Brian Patenaude; Michael Chappell; Salima Makni; Timothy Behrens; Christian Beckmann; Mark Jenkinson; Stephen M Smith
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2008-11-13       Impact factor: 6.556

5.  Threshold-free cluster enhancement: addressing problems of smoothing, threshold dependence and localisation in cluster inference.

Authors:  Stephen M Smith; Thomas E Nichols
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2008-04-11       Impact factor: 6.556

6.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

Review 7.  Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience.

Authors:  Katherine S Button; John P A Ioannidis; Claire Mokrysz; Brian A Nosek; Jonathan Flint; Emma S J Robinson; Marcus R Munafò
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 34.870

8.  Functional connectivity with distinct neural networks tracks fluctuations in gain/loss framing susceptibility.

Authors:  David V Smith; Kamila E Sip; Mauricio R Delgado
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2015-04-08       Impact factor: 5.038

9.  Large-scale automated synthesis of human functional neuroimaging data.

Authors:  Tal Yarkoni; Russell A Poldrack; Thomas E Nichols; David C Van Essen; Tor D Wager
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2011-06-26       Impact factor: 28.547

10.  On the relationship between the "default mode network" and the "social brain".

Authors:  Rogier B Mars; Franz-Xaver Neubert; Maryann P Noonan; Jerome Sallet; Ivan Toni; Matthew F S Rushworth
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2012-06-21       Impact factor: 3.169

View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Neural underpinnings of maladaptive decision-making in addictions.

Authors:  Zoe Guttman; Scott J Moeller; Edythe D London
Journal:  Pharmacol Biochem Behav       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 3.533

2.  Shared and distinct neural circuitry for nonsymbolic and symbolic double-digit addition.

Authors:  Stephanie Bugden; Marty G Woldorff; Elizabeth M Brannon
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2018-12-12       Impact factor: 5.038

Review 3.  Decision neuroscience and neuroeconomics: Recent progress and ongoing challenges.

Authors:  Jeffrey B Dennison; Daniel Sazhin; David V Smith
Journal:  Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci       Date:  2022-02-08

4.  The Neural Mechanism of the Social Framing Effect: Evidence from fMRI and tDCS Studies.

Authors:  Jie Liu; Ruolei Gu; Chong Liao; Juanzhi Lu; Yuxing Fang; Pengfei Xu; Yue-Jia Luo; Fang Cui
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Greater learning transfer effect for avoidance of loss than for achievement of gain in Finnish and Russian schoolchildren.

Authors:  A A Sozinov; S Laukka; A I Lyashchenko; A Siipo; M Nopanen; T Tuominen; Yu I Alexandrov
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2020-06-09

6.  Working memory loads differentially influence frame-induced bias and normative choice in risky decision making.

Authors:  John M Hinson; Paul Whitney; Cristina G Wilson; Amy T Nusbaum
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-03-28       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Deciding for Future Selves Reduces Loss Aversion.

Authors:  Qiqi Cheng; Guibing He
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-09-20

8.  How Neurobiology Elucidates the Role of Emotions in Financial Decision-Making.

Authors:  Peter Bossaerts
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-07-19
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.