ArticleNeuroImage2019
Single-trial EEG dissociates motivation and conflict processes during decision-making under risk.
Article in NeuroImage, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- EEG-Based Prediction of Stress Responses to Naturalistic Decision-Making Stimuli in Police Cadets.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Verify the effects of esports on cognitive skill: focusing on decision making.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Religiosity, Financial Risk Taking, and Reward Processing: An Experimental Study.Journal of gambling studies · 2025Article
- Hypocretin-1 receptor antagonism improves inhibitory control during the Go/No-Go task in highly motivated, impulsive male mice.Psychopharmacology · 2024Article
- Risk-Taking Is Associated with Decreased Subjective Value Signals and Increased Prediction Error Signals in the Hot Columbia Card Task.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024Article
- The neural representation of metacognition in preferential decision-making.Human brain mapping · 2024Article
- Machine learning-based classifying of risk-takers and risk-aversive individuals using resting-state EEG data: A pilot feasibility study.Brain and behavior · 2023Article
- Brain network analysis reveals convergent and divergent aberrations between mild stroke patients with cortical and subcortical infarcts during cognitive task performing.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2023Article
- The neural dynamics of loss aversion.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2023Article
- Mapping and understanding of correlated electroencephalogram (EEG) responses to the newsvendor problem.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Prediction of dispositional dialectical thinking from resting-state electroencephalography.Brain and behavior · 2021Article
- A Review of Possible EEG Markers of Abstraction, Attentiveness, and Memorisation in Cyber-Physical Systems for Special Education.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In making decisions under risk (i.e., choosing whether to gamble when the outcome probabilities are known), two aspects of decision are of particular concern. The first, if gambling, is how large are potential gains compared to losses? The subjectively larger, the more rewarding to gamble. Thus, this aspect of decision-making, quantified through expected utility (EU), is motivation-related. The second concern is how easy is it to reach the decision? When subjective desirability between gambling and not-gambling is clearly different from each other (regardless of the direction), it is easier to decide. This aspect, quantified through utility distance (UD), is conflict-related. It is unclear how the brain simultaneously processes these two aspects of decision-making. Forty-five participants decided whether to gamble during electroencephalogram (EEG) recording. To compute trial-by-trial variability in EU and UD, we fit participants' choices to models inspired by Expected-Utility and Prospect theories using hierarchical-Bayesian modeling. To examine unique influences of EU and UD, we conducted model-based single-trial EEG analyses with EU and UD as simultaneous regressors. While both EU and UD were positively associated with P3-like activity and delta-band power, the contribution of EU was around 200 ms earlier. Thus, during decision-making under risk, people may allocate their attention to motivation-related aspects before conflict-related aspects. Next, following learning the options and before reporting their decision, higher EU was associated with stronger alpha and beta suppression, while higher UD was associated with a stronger contingent-negativity-variation-like activity. This suggests distinct roles of EU and UD on anticipation-related processes. Overall, we identified time and frequency characteristics of EEG signals that differentially traced motivation-related and conflict-related information during decision-making under risk.
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.