↓ Skip to main content

Neural Correlates of Adaptive Decision Making for Risky Gains and Losses

Overview of attention for article published in Psychological Science, November 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Readers on

mendeley
368 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Neural Correlates of Adaptive Decision Making for Risky Gains and Losses
Published in
Psychological Science, November 2007
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.02009.x
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Do decisions about potential gains and potential losses require different neural structures for advantageous choices? In a lesion study, we used a new measure of adaptive decision making under risk to examine whether damage to neural structures subserving emotion affects an individual's ability to make adaptive decisions differentially for gains and losses. We found that individuals with lesions to the amygdala, an area responsible for processing emotional responses, displayed impaired decision making when considering potential gains, but not when considering potential losses. In contrast, patients with damage to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, an area responsible for integrating cognitive and emotional information, showed deficits in both domains. We argue that this dissociation provides evidence that adaptive decision making for risks involving potential losses may be more difficult to disrupt than adaptive decision making for risks involving potential gains. This research further demonstrates the role of emotion in decision competence.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 368 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 18 5%
Spain 6 2%
United Kingdom 4 1%
Switzerland 4 1%
China 3 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Other 4 1%
Unknown 323 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 93 25%
Researcher 54 15%
Student > Master 38 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 26 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 23 6%
Other 91 25%
Unknown 43 12%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 182 49%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 7%
Neuroscience 23 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 16 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 4%
Other 43 12%
Unknown 64 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 September 2016.
All research outputs
#14,921,576
of 26,402,731 outputs
Outputs from Psychological Science
#3,686
of 4,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,286
of 90,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychological Science
#11
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,402,731 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,361 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 87.3. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 90,001 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.