ArticleScientific reports2025
Modeling value integration during decision making under uncertainty with the Florida and Georgia gambling task.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Humans frequently make decisions that involve repeated interactions under uncertainty in everyday life. A constellation of cognitive biases drive such decisions. To investigate the extent to which these biases influence decision making by altering how values are integrated in choices, we developed a novel paradigm-the Florida-And-Georgia (FLAG) gambling task. In the FLAG task, participants chose between a deck, which yields variable outcomes, and a sure-thing offer. This approach allows us to model value integration as influenced by both learning processes (e.g., primacy-recency bias) and key factors drawn from Prospect Theory, including sensitivity to outliers and loss aversion. Our findings on 170 young adults revealed that individuals underweight outliers for both gains and losses in their decision making and were biased by recent outcomes; but there was no evidence of loss aversion. The FLAG task strives to strike a balance between experimental control and ecological validity, providing insights into the cognitive processes involved in decision making. In closing, we discuss future directions for the FLAG task and its potential societal and clinical applications.
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.