| Literature DB >> 31730790 |
Benjamin James Dyson1, Cecile Musgrave2, Cameron Rowe2, Rayman Sandhur2.
Abstract
To examine the behavioural and neural interactions between objective and subjective performance during competitive decision-making, participants completed a Matching Pennies game where win-rates were fixed within three conditions (win > lose, win = lose, win < lose) and outcomes were predicted at each trial. Using random behaviour as the hallmark of optimal performance, we observed item (heads), contingency (win-stay, lose-shift) and combinatorial (HH, HT, TH, TT) biases across all conditions. Higher-quality behaviour represented by a reduction in combinatorial bias was observed during high win-rate exposure. In contrast, over-optimism biases were observed only in conditions where win rates were equal to, or less than, loss rates. At a group level, a neural measure of outcome evaluation (feedback-related negativity; FRN) indexed the binary distinction between positive and negative outcome. At an individual level, increased belief in successful performance accentuated FRN amplitude differences between wins and losses. Taken together, the data suggest that objective experiences of, or, subjective beliefs in, the predominance of positive outcomes may be mutual attempts to self-regulate performance during competition. In this way, increased exposure to positive outcomes (real or imagined) may help to weight the output of the more diligent and analytic System 2, relative to the impulsive and intuitive System 1.Entities:
Keywords: Competitive decision-making; Feedback-related negativity (FRN); Matching Pennies; Randomness; Sequential effects; System 1/2; Win-stay/lose-shift
Year: 2019 PMID: 31730790 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2019.11.002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Psychophysiol ISSN: 0167-8760 Impact factor: 2.997