↓ Skip to main content

Toward an Affective Neuroscience Account of Financial Risk Taking

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
17 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Readers on

mendeley
197 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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.
Title
Toward an Affective Neuroscience Account of Financial Risk Taking
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2012.00159
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charlene C. Wu, Matthew D. Sacchet, Brian Knutson

Abstract

To explain human financial risk taking, economic, and finance theories typically refer to the mathematical properties of financial options, whereas psychological theories have emphasized the influence of emotion and cognition on choice. From a neuroscience perspective, choice emanates from a dynamic multicomponential process. Recent technological advances in neuroimaging have made it possible for researchers to separately visualize perceptual input, intermediate processing, and motor output. An affective neuroscience account of financial risk taking thus might illuminate affective mediators that bridge the gap between statistical input and choice output. To test this hypothesis, we conducted a quantitative meta-analysis (via activation likelihood estimate or ALE) of functional magnetic resonance imaging experiments that focused on neural responses to financial options with varying statistical moments (i.e., mean, variance, skewness). Results suggested that different statistical moments elicit both common and distinct patterns of neural activity. Across studies, high versus low mean had the highest probability of increasing ventral striatal activity, but high versus low variance had the highest probability of increasing anterior insula activity. Further, high versus low skewness had the highest probability of increasing ventral striatal activity. Since ventral striatal activity has been associated with positive aroused affect (e.g., excitement), whereas anterior insular activity has been associated with negative aroused affect (e.g., anxiety) or general arousal, these findings are consistent with the notion that statistical input influences choice output by eliciting anticipatory affect. The findings also imply that neural activity can be used to predict financial risk taking - both when it conforms to and violates traditional models of choice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 197 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 3 2%
United States 2 1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 186 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 43 22%
Researcher 24 12%
Student > Bachelor 22 11%
Student > Master 21 11%
Professor 12 6%
Other 39 20%
Unknown 36 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 62 31%
Neuroscience 23 12%
Business, Management and Accounting 18 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 11 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 5%
Other 31 16%
Unknown 43 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 30 October 2019.
All research outputs
#1,273,769
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#562
of 11,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,968
of 250,099 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#8
of 154 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,541 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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 250,099 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.