↓ Skip to main content

Among three different executive functions, general executive control ability is a key predictor of decision making under objective risk

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 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
Among three different executive functions, general executive control ability is a key predictor of decision making under objective risk
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01386
Pubmed ID
Authors

Johannes Schiebener, Elisa Wegmann, Bettina Gathmann, Christian Laier, Mirko Pawlikowski, Matthias Brand

Abstract

Executive functioning is supposed to have an important role in decision making under risk. Several studies reported that more advantageous decision-making behavior was accompanied by better performance in tests of executive functioning and that the decision-making process was accompanied by activations in prefrontal and subcortical brain regions associated with executive functioning. However, to what extent different components of executive functions contribute to decision making is still unclear. We tested direct and indirect effects of three executive functions on decision-making performance in a laboratory gambling task, the Game of Dice Task (GDT). Using Brand's model of decisions under risk (2006) we tested seven structural equation models with three latent variables that represent executive functions supposed to be involved in decision making. The latent variables were general control (represented by the general ability to exert attentional and behavioral self-control that is in accordance with task goals despite interfering information), concept formation (represented by categorization, rule detection, and set maintenance), and monitoring (represented by supervision of cognition and behavior). The seven models indicated that only the latent dimension general control had a direct effect on decision making under risk. Concept formation and monitoring only contributed in terms of indirect effects, when mediated by general control. Thus, several components of executive functioning seem to be involved in decision making under risk. However, general control functions seem to have a key role. They may be important for implementing the calculative and cognitively controlled processes involved in advantageous decision making under risk.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 3 3%
Spain 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 102 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 21%
Student > Master 17 16%
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Researcher 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 18 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 49 46%
Neuroscience 11 10%
Computer Science 5 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 22 21%
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 22 February 2015.
All research outputs
#19,945,185
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#23,355
of 34,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#259,281
of 368,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#312
of 363 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 34,411 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 368,291 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 363 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.