Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32581698›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2020

Behavioral and Neural Arguments of Motivational Influence on Decision Making During Uncertainty.

Julie Giustiniani, Magali Nicolier, Juliana Teti Mayer, Thibault Chabin, Caroline Masse, Nathan Galmès, Lionel Pazart, Benoit Trojak, Djamila Bennabi, Pierre Vandel and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Julie GiustinianiDepartment of Clinical Psychiatry, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France.
Magali NicolierDepartment of Clinical Psychiatry, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France.
Juliana Teti MayerDepartment of Clinical Psychiatry, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France.
Thibault ChabinEA 481, Laboratory of Neurosciences, University of Burgundy Franche-Comté, Besançon, France.
Caroline MasseDepartment of Clinical Psychiatry, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France.
Nathan GalmèsEA 481, Laboratory of Neurosciences, University of Burgundy Franche-Comté, Besançon, France.
Lionel PazartEA 481, Laboratory of Neurosciences, University of Burgundy Franche-Comté, Besançon, France.
Benoit TrojakFondation FondaMental, Hôpital Albert Chenevier, Créteil, France.
Djamila BennabiDepartment of Clinical Psychiatry, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France.
Pierre VandelDepartment of Clinical Psychiatry, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France.
Emmanuel HaffenDepartment of Clinical Psychiatry, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France.
Damien GabrielEA 481, Laboratory of Neurosciences, University of Burgundy Franche-Comté, Besançon, France.
Université de Bourgogne · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The scientific world is increasingly interested in motivation, primarily due to the suspected impact on decision-making abilities, particularly in uncertain conditions. To explore this plausible relationship, 28 healthy participants were included in the study and performed decision-making and motivational tasks while their neural activity was recorded. All participants performed the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) and were split into two groups based on their score, one favorable group with 14 participants who performed advantageously and one undecided group with 14 participants who failed to develop the correct strategy on the IGT. In addition, all participants performed the Effort Expenditure for Reward Task (EEfRT), which defines the motivational level of each participant by the effort that participants agree to do in function of reward magnitudes and probabilities to receive these reward (10, 50, and 90%). The completion of both tasks allowed for the exploration of the relationship between the motivational level and decision-making abilities. The EEfRT was adapted to electroencephalography (EEG) recordings to explore how motivation could influence reward experience. Behavioral results showed no difference in EEfRT performances on the whole task between the two groups' performances on the IGT. However, there was a negative correlation between the difficulty to develop an optimal strategy on the IGT and the percentage of difficult choices at the 90% condition on the EEfRT. Each probability condition has been previously associated to different motivational and emotional states, with the 90% condition associated to the reward sensitivity. This behavioral result leads to the hypothesis that reward sensitivity may induce an inability to develop an optimal strategy on the IGT. Group analysis demonstrated that only the undecided group showed a P300 during the processing of the outcome, whereas the favorable group showed a blunted P300. Similarly, there was a negative correlation between the P300 amplitude and the ability to develop an optimal strategy on the IGT. In conclusion, behavioral and neuronal data provides evidence that the propensity to focus only on the immediate outcomes is related to the development of an inefficient strategy on the IGT, without influence of motivation.

Indexed as

decision-makingEEfRTeffortIGTmotivationP300uncertainty

Identifiers

PMID32581698
PMCPMC7290000
OpenAlexW3027713425

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.