ArticleNeuropsychology, development, and cognition. Section B, Aging, neuropsychology and cognition2020
Differential focus on probability and losses between young and older adults in risky decision-making.
Article in Neuropsychology, development, and cognition. Section B, Aging, neuropsychology and cognition, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Age differences in susceptibility to stroke-related health misinformation on social media: the role of prior experience and corrective feedback.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- The Appraisal Approach to Aging and Emotion: An Integrative Theoretical Framework.Developmental review : DR · 2021Article
- Age Influences Loss Aversion Through Effects on Posterior Cingulate Cortical Thickness.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
- Losing Money and Motivation: Effects of Loss Incentives on Motivation and Metacognition in Younger and Older Adults.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Age-Related Differences in Framing Selective Memory in Terms of Gains and Losses.Experimental aging researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We examined young and older adults' use of descriptive information about risk (i.e., probability and expected value) in financial decision-making. In Experiment 1, participants chose between lotteries in pairs of bets that offered either two risky gains or one risky gain and one sure gain. Whereas they showed a strong and indiscriminate preference for high-probability gambles in risky-risky pairs, they selected sure options at high rates and risky options at low rates in risky-sure pairs, with slightly stronger effects in older relative to young adults due to age differences in ability. Experiment 2 involved the same task but in terms of losses. Participants, especially older adults, preferred low-probability gambles not accounted for by age differences in ability. Results suggest minimal consideration of expected value and a strong focus on probabilities in decision-making. They also suggest that cognitive ability and chronic goals differentially influence age effects depending on risk context.
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.