ArticleScientific reports2017
Gambling-like behavior in pigeons: 'jackpot' signals promote maladaptive risky choice.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Midsession Reversal Task with Variable Trial Spacings: Further Tests of the Timing Hypothesis with Starlings.Perspectives on behavior science · 2025Review
- Space, feature, and risk sensitivity in homing pigeons (Columba livia): Broadening the conversation on the role of the avian hippocampus in memory.Learning & behavior · 2022Article
- The midsession reversal task: A theoretical analysis.Learning & behavior · 2020Review
- Challenges and Opportunities in Animal Models of Gambling-like Behavior.Current opinion in behavioral sciences · 2020Article
- Evaluation of Risk Behavior in Gambling Addicted and Opioid Addicted Individuals.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2020Article
- Midsession reversal learning by pigeons: Effect on accuracy of increasing the number of stimuli associated with one of the alternatives.Learning & behavior · 2019Article
- The role of 'jackpot' stimuli in maladaptive decision-making: dissociable effects of D1/D2 receptor agonists and antagonists.Psychopharmacology · 2018Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Individuals often face choices that have uncertain outcomes and have important consequences. As a model of this environment, laboratory experiments often offer a choice between an uncertain, large reward that varies in its probability of delivery against a certain but smaller reward as a measure of an individual's risk aversion. An important factor generally lacking from these procedures are gambling related cues that may moderate risk preferences. The present experiment offered pigeons choices between unreliable and certain rewards but, for the Signaled group on winning choices, presented a 'jackpot' signal prior to reward delivery. The Unsignaled group received an ambiguous stimulus not informative of choice outcomes. For the Signaled group, presenting win signals effectively blocked value discounting for the large, uncertain outcome as the probability of a loss increased, whereas the Unsignaled group showed regular preference changes similar to previous research lacking gambling related cues. These maladaptive choices were further shown to be unaffected by more salient loss signals and resistant to response cost increases. The results suggest an important role of an individual's sensitivity to outcome-correlated cues in influencing risky choices that may moderate gambling behaviors in humans, particularly in casino and other gambling-specific environments.
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.