ArticleFrontiers in psychology2019
An Event-Related Potential Study of Decision-Making and Feedback Utilization in Female College Students Who Binge Drink.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2019. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex differences in compulsive alcohol drinking phenotypes: implications for decision-making and social behavior in a preclinical model.Psychopharmacology · 2026Article
- The neurophysiological effects of detached and positive reappraisal during the regulation of self-conscious emotions.Psychoradiology · 2024Article
- Study on the influence mechanism of perceived benefits on unsafe behavioral decision-making based on ERPs and EROs.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Binge Drinking and Problem Gambling Association in Adolescents and Young Adults.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- Adolescent brain maturation and the neuropathological effects of binge drinking: A critical review.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Review
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
This study investigated the ability to use feedback for decision-making in female college students who binge drink (BD) using the iowa gambling task (IGT) and event-related potentials (ERPs). Twenty-seven binge drinkers and 23 non-binge drinkers (non-BD) were identified based on scores on the Korean version of the Alcohol Use Disorder Test and the Alcohol Use Questionnaire. The IGT consists of four cards, including two cards that result in a net loss, with large immediate gains but greater losses in the long term, and two cards that result in a net gain, with small immediate gains but reduced losses in the long term. Participants were required to choose one card at a time to maximize profit until the end of the task while avoiding losses. The BD group showed a significantly lower total net score than the non-BD group, indicating that the BD group chose more disadvantageous cards. The BD group showed significantly smaller ΔFRN amplitudes [difference in amplitudes of feedback-related negativity (FRN) between gain and loss feedback] but not in P3 amplitudes. Additionally, ΔFRN amplitudes in the fronto-central area were positively correlated with the total net score and net scores for sectors 4 and 5. Thus, total net scores and later performance on the IGT increased as ΔFRN amplitudes from the fronto-central area increased. FRN is known to reflect early feedback evaluation employing a bottom-up mechanism, whereas P3 is known to reflect late feedback processing and allocation of attentional resources using a top-down mechanism. These results indicate that college students who binge drink have deficits in early evaluation of positive or negative feedback and that this deficit may be related to decision-making deficits.
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.