↓ Skip to main content

Bayesian techniques for analyzing group differences in the Iowa Gambling Task: A case study of intuitive and deliberate decision-makers

Overview of attention for article published in Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
Title
Bayesian techniques for analyzing group differences in the Iowa Gambling Task: A case study of intuitive and deliberate decision-makers
Published in
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, July 2017
DOI 10.3758/s13423-017-1331-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Helen Steingroever, Thorsten Pachur, Martin Šmíra, Michael D. Lee

Abstract

The Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) is one of the most popular experimental paradigms for comparing complex decision-making across groups. Most commonly, IGT behavior is analyzed using frequentist tests to compare performance across groups, and to compare inferred parameters of cognitive models developed for the IGT. Here, we present a Bayesian alternative based on Bayesian repeated-measures ANOVA for comparing performance, and a suite of three complementary model-based methods for assessing the cognitive processes underlying IGT performance. The three model-based methods involve Bayesian hierarchical parameter estimation, Bayes factor model comparison, and Bayesian latent-mixture modeling. We illustrate these Bayesian methods by applying them to test the extent to which differences in intuitive versus deliberate decision style are associated with differences in IGT performance. The results show that intuitive and deliberate decision-makers behave similarly on the IGT, and the modeling analyses consistently suggest that both groups of decision-makers rely on similar cognitive processes. Our results challenge the notion that individual differences in intuitive and deliberate decision styles have a broad impact on decision-making. They also highlight the advantages of Bayesian methods, especially their ability to quantify evidence in favor of the null hypothesis, and that they allow model-based analyses to incorporate hierarchical and latent-mixture structures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Czechia 1 1%
Unknown 89 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 24%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Master 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 26 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 34 38%
Neuroscience 6 7%
Engineering 3 3%
Decision Sciences 3 3%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 31 34%