Normatively irrelevant disgust interferes with decision under uncertainty: Insights from the Iowa gambling task.

This study investigates whether a not informative, irrelevant emotional reaction of disgust interferes with decision-making under uncertainty. We manipulate the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) by associating a disgust-eliciting image with selections from Disadvantageous/Bad decks (Congruent condition) or Advantageous/Good decks (Incongruent condition). A Control condition without manipulations is also included. Results indicate an increased probability of selecting from a Good deck as the task unfolds in all conditions. However, this effect is modulated by the experimental manipulation. Specifically, we detect a detrimental effect (i.e., a significant decrease in the intercept) of the disgust-eliciting image in Incongruent condition (vs. Control), but this effect is limited to the early stages of the task (i.e., first twenty trials). No differences in performance trends are detected between Congruent and Control conditions. Anticipatory Skin Conductance Response, heart rate, and pupil dilation are also assessed as indexes of anticipatory autonomic activation following the Somatic Marker Hypothesis, but no effects are shown for the first two indexes in any of the conditions. Only a decreasing trend is detected for pupil dilation as the task unfolds in Control and Incongruent conditions. Results are discussed in line with the "risk as feelings" framework, the Somatic Marker Hypothesis, and IGT literature.