ArticleFrontiers in psychology2015
Decision making in healthy participants on the Iowa Gambling Task: new insights from an operant approach.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Level and Nature of Impairment on the Iowa Gambling Task Following Acquired Brain Injury: A Meta-analysis.Neuropsychology review · 2026Pooled it
- Multisession transcranial direct current stimulation and aerobic exercise synergistically improve food craving symptoms, impulsivity, and cognitive flexibility in women with overweight and obesity: a randomized controlled trial.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2025Trial
- Trial
- To Fear Is to Gain? The Role of Fear Recognition in Risky Decision Making in TBI Patients and Healthy Controls.PloS one · 2016Trial
- Dissociation of decision-making from escalated drug intake within a long-access model.Behavioural brain research · 2026Article
- Evaluating the influence of C/t on sensitivity to relative S+ production rate.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior · 2026Article
- Potential roles for vitamin D in preventing and treating impulse control disorders, behavioral addictions, and substance use disorders: A scoping review.Addiction neuroscience · 2025Article
- Age-group differences in trust-related decision-making and learning.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Gambling associated risk-taking decision in cerebellar ataxia.Parkinsonism & related disorders · 2023Article
- The effect of an affect, sensation seeking, and premeditation on risky decision-making: Conditional process analysis.PloS one · 2023Article
- Article
- Exploring decision-making strategies in the Iowa gambling task and rat gambling task.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2022Article
- Reanalyzing the Maia and McClelland (2004) Empirical Data: How Do Participants Really Behave in the Iowa Gambling Task?Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Review
- Using Methods From Computational Decision-making to Predict Nonadherence to Fitness Goals: Protocol for an Observational Study.JMIR research protocols · 2021Article
- Modeling Skin Conductance Response Time Series during Consecutive Rapid Decision-Making under Concurrent Temporal Pressure and Information Ambiguity.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Do Hot Executive Functions Relate to BMI and Body Composition in School Age Children?Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Heart Rate Variability and Decision-Making: Autonomic Responses in Making Decisions.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Component Processes of Decision Making in a Community Sample of Precariously Housed Persons: Associations With Learning and Memory, and Health-Risk Behaviors.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Role of Cortisol and Testosterone in Risky Decision-Making: Deciphering Male Decision-Making in the Iowa Gambling Task.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
- Recollecting Cross-Cultural Evidences: Are Decision Makers Really Foresighted in Iowa Gambling Task?Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) has contributed greatly to the study of affective decision making. However, researchers have observed high inter-study and inter-individual variability in IGT performance in healthy participants, and many are classified as impaired using standard criteria. Additionally, while decision-making deficits are often attributed to atypical sensitivity to reward and/or punishment, the IGT lacks an integrated sensitivity measure. Adopting an operant perspective, two experiments were conducted to explore these issues. In Experiment 1, 50 healthy participants completed a 200-trial version of the IGT which otherwise closely emulated Bechara et al.'s (1999) original computer task. Group data for Trials 1-100 closely replicated Bechara et al.'s original findings of high net scores and preferences for advantageous decks, suggesting that implementations that depart significantly from Bechara's standard IGT contribute to inter-study variability. During Trials 101-200, mean net scores improved significantly and the percentage of participants meeting the "impaired" criterion was halved. An operant-style stability criterion applied to individual data revealed this was likely related to individual differences in learning rate. Experiment 2 used a novel operant card task-the Auckland Card Task (ACT)-to derive quantitative estimates of sensitivity using the generalized matching law. Relative to individuals who mastered the IGT, persistent poor performers on the IGT exhibited significantly lower sensitivity to magnitudes (but not frequencies) of rewards and punishers on the ACT. Overall, our findings demonstrate the utility of operant-style analysis of IGT data and the potential of applying operant concurrent-schedule procedures to the study of human decision making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.