ArticleJournal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS2016
The Allure of High-Risk Rewards in Huntington's disease.
Article in Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Executive Impairment in Huntington's Disease: Insights From a Systematic Review of the Literature.Brain and behavior · 2026Pooled it
- Decision cost hypersensitivity underlies Huntington's disease apathy.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2025Article
- Disentangling the neurobiological bases of temporal impulsivity in Huntington's disease.Brain and behavior · 2024Article
- Huntington disease exacerbates action impulses.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Disordered Decision Making: A Cognitive Framework for Apathy and Impulsivity in Huntington's Disease.Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society · 2022Review
- Aberrant Striatal Value Representation in Huntington's Disease Gene Carriers 25 Years Before Onset.Biological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesHuntington's disease (HD) is a neurodegenerative disorder that produces a bias toward risky, reward-driven decisions in situations where the outcomes of decisions are uncertain and must be discovered. However, it is unclear whether HD patients show similar biases in decision-making when learning demands are minimized and prospective risks and outcomes are known explicitly. We investigated how risk decision-making strategies and adjustments are altered in HD patients when reward contingencies are explicit.
methodsHD (N=18) and healthy control (HC; N=17) participants completed a risk-taking task in which they made a series of independent choices between a low-risk/low reward and high-risk/high reward risk options.
resultsComputational modeling showed that compared to HC, who showed a clear preference for low-risk compared to high-risk decisions, the HD group valued high-risks more than low-risk decisions, especially when high-risks were rewarded. The strategy analysis indicated that when high-risk options were rewarded, HC adopted a conservative risk strategy on the next trial by preferring the low-risk option (i.e., they counted their blessings and then played the surer bet). In contrast, following a rewarded high-risk choice, HD patients showed a clear preference for repeating the high-risk choice.
conclusionsThese results indicate a pattern of high-risk/high-reward decision bias in HD that persists when outcomes and risks are certain. The allure of high-risk/high-reward decisions in situations of risk certainty and uncertainty expands our insight into the dynamic decision-making deficits that create considerable clinical burden in HD.
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.