↓ Skip to main content

Differences in neural activation as a function of risk-taking task parameters

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
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
Differences in neural activation as a function of risk-taking task parameters
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2013.00173
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eliza Congdon, Angelica A. Bato, Tom Schonberg, Jeanette A. Mumford, Katherine H. Karlsgodt, Fred W. Sabb, Edythe D. London, Tyrone D. Cannon, Robert M. Bilder, Russell A. Poldrack

Abstract

Despite evidence supporting a relationship between impulsivity and naturalistic risk-taking, the relationship of impulsivity with laboratory-based measures of risky decision-making remains unclear. One factor contributing to this gap in our understanding is the degree to which different risky decision-making tasks vary in their details. We conducted an fMRI investigation of the Angling Risk Task (ART), which is an improved behavioral measure of risky decision-making. In order to examine whether the observed pattern of neural activation was specific to the ART or generalizable, we also examined correlates of the Balloon Analog Risk Taking (BART) task in the same sample of 23 healthy adults. Exploratory analyses were conducted to examine the relationship between neural activation, performance, impulsivity and self-reported risk-taking. While activation in a valuation network was associated with reward tracking during the ART but not the BART, increased fronto-cingulate activation was seen during risky choice trials in the BART as compared to the ART. Thus, neural activation during risky decision-making trials differed between the two tasks, and this observation was likely driven by differences in task parameters, namely the absence vs. presence of ambiguity and/or stationary vs. increasing probability of loss on the ART and BART, respectively. Exploratory association analyses suggest that sensitivity of neural response to the magnitude of potential reward during the ART was associated with a suboptimal performance strategy, higher scores on a scale of dysfunctional impulsivity (DI) and a greater likelihood of engaging in risky behaviors, while this pattern was not seen for the BART. Our results suggest that the ART is decomposable and associated with distinct patterns of neural activation; this represents a preliminary step toward characterizing a behavioral measure of risky decision-making that may support a better understanding of naturalistic risk-taking.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 5%
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 89 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 27%
Researcher 11 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 9%
Student > Master 9 9%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Other 18 19%
Unknown 14 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 37 39%
Neuroscience 8 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 7%
Engineering 5 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 23 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 October 2013.
All research outputs
#19,941,677
of 25,368,786 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#8,668
of 11,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,301
of 288,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#169
of 246 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,368,786 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,537 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 288,991 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 246 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.