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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
What are the Odds? The Neural Correlates of Active Choice during Gambling
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2012.00046 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bettina Studer, Annemieke M. Apergis-Schoute, Trevor W. Robbins, Luke Clark |
| Abstract |
Gambling is a widespread recreational activity and requires pitting the values of potential wins and losses against their probability of occurrence. Neuropsychological research showed that betting behavior on laboratory gambling tasks is highly sensitive to focal lesions to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) and insula. In the current study, we assessed the neural basis of betting choices in healthy participants, using functional magnetic resonance imaging of the Roulette Betting Task. In half of the trials, participants actively chose their bets; in the other half, the computer dictated the bet size. Our results highlight the impact of volitional choice upon gambling-related brain activity: Neural activity in a distributed network - including key structures of the reward circuitry (midbrain, striatum) - was higher during active compared to computer-dictated bet selection. In line with neuropsychological data, the anterior insula and vmPFC were more activated during self-directed bet selection, and responses in these areas were differentially modulated by the odds of winning in the two choice conditions. In addition, responses in the vmPFC and ventral striatum were modulated by the bet size. Convergent with electrophysiological research in macaques, our results further implicate the inferior parietal cortex (IPC) in the processing of the likelihood of potential outcomes: Neural responses in the IPC bilaterally reflected the probability of winning during bet selection. Moreover, the IPC was particularly sensitive to the odds of winning in the active-choice condition, when the processing of this information was required to guide bet selection. Our results indicate an important role of the IPC in human decision-making under risk and help to integrate neuropsychological data of risk-taking following vmPFC and insula damage with models of choice derived from human neuroimaging and monkey electrophysiology. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 20% |
| Mexico | 1 | 20% |
| Colombia | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 4 | 4% |
| Germany | 2 | 2% |
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 97 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 35 | 33% |
| Researcher | 17 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 15% |
| Unknown | 13 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 49 | 46% |
| Neuroscience | 12 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Unknown | 22 | 21% |
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 20 May 2017.
All research outputs
#8,534,976
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#5,436
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,505
of 250,100 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#73
of 154 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
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 250,100 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 154 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.