• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

认知决策模型对临床评估的贡献:剖析在贝查拉赌博任务中的表现。

A contribution of cognitive decision models to clinical assessment: decomposing performance on the Bechara gambling task.

作者信息

Busemeyer Jerome R, Stout Julie C

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA.

出版信息

Psychol Assess. 2002 Sep;14(3):253-62. doi: 10.1037//1040-3590.14.3.253.

DOI:10.1037//1040-3590.14.3.253
PMID:12214432
Abstract

The Bechara simulated gambling task is a popular method of examining decision-making deficits exhibited by people with brain damage, psychopathology, antisocial personality, or drug abuse problems. However, performance on this task is confounded by complex interdependencies between cognitive, motivational, and response processes, making it difficult to sort out and identify the specific processes responsible for the observed behavioral deficits. The authors compare 3 competing cognitive decision models of the Bechara task in terms of their ability to explain the performance deficits observed in Huntington's disease patients as compared with healthy populations and people with Parkinson's disease. The parameters of the best fitting model are used to decompose the observed performance deficit of the Huntington patients into cognitive, motivational, and response sources.

摘要

贝查拉模拟赌博任务是一种常用的方法,用于研究脑损伤、精神病理学、反社会人格或药物滥用问题患者所表现出的决策缺陷。然而,该任务的表现受到认知、动机和反应过程之间复杂的相互依赖关系的混淆,使得难以梳理和识别导致观察到的行为缺陷的具体过程。作者比较了贝查拉任务的三种相互竞争的认知决策模型,看它们在解释亨廷顿舞蹈症患者与健康人群及帕金森病患者相比所观察到的表现缺陷方面的能力。最佳拟合模型的参数被用于将观察到的亨廷顿患者的表现缺陷分解为认知、动机和反应来源。

相似文献

1
A contribution of cognitive decision models to clinical assessment: decomposing performance on the Bechara gambling task.认知决策模型对临床评估的贡献:剖析在贝查拉赌博任务中的表现。
Psychol Assess. 2002 Sep;14(3):253-62. doi: 10.1037//1040-3590.14.3.253.
2
Decision-making in Parkinson's disease patients with and without pathological gambling.帕金森病伴与不伴病理性赌博患者的决策。
Eur J Neurol. 2010 Jan;17(1):97-102. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-1331.2009.02792.x. Epub 2009 Sep 23.
3
Risky decision making in Huntington's disease.亨廷顿舞蹈症中的风险决策
J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2001 Jan;7(1):92-101. doi: 10.1017/s1355617701711095.
4
Decision making in Parkinson's disease: Analysis of behavioral and physiological patterns in the Iowa gambling task.帕金森病中的决策制定:爱荷华赌博任务中行为和生理模式的分析。
Mov Disord. 2008 Mar 15;23(4):547-52. doi: 10.1002/mds.21865.
5
Behavior rating inventory of executive function.执行功能行为评定量表
Child Neuropsychol. 2000 Sep;6(3):235-8. doi: 10.1076/chin.6.3.235.3152.
6
Decision making in bipolar disorder: a cognitive modeling approach.双相情感障碍中的决策制定:一种认知建模方法。
Psychiatry Res. 2008 Nov 30;161(2):142-52. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2007.07.001. Epub 2008 Oct 9.
7
Neurocognitive deficits related to poor decision making in people behind bars.与狱中人员决策能力差相关的神经认知缺陷。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2008 Feb;15(1):44-51. doi: 10.3758/pbr.15.1.44.
8
The Iowa Gambling Task in Parkinson's disease: A meta-analysis on effects of disease and medication.帕金森病中的爱荷华赌博任务:关于疾病和药物影响的荟萃分析
Neuropsychologia. 2016 Oct;91:163-172. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.07.032. Epub 2016 Jul 27.
9
[Value of the brief neuropsychological tests for detection of acquired cognitive deficits. Exemplified by the Lehrl and Fischer c.I. (cerebral insufficiency) test].[简短神经心理学测试对检测后天认知缺陷的价值。以莱尔和菲舍尔c.I.(脑功能不全)测试为例]
Nervenarzt. 1993 Dec;64(12):793-800.
10
Somatic markers, working memory, and decision making.躯体标记、工作记忆与决策
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2002 Dec;2(4):341-53. doi: 10.3758/cabn.2.4.341.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparing likelihood-based and likelihood-free approaches to fitting and comparing models of intertemporal choice.比较基于似然性和无似然性的方法来拟合和比较跨期选择模型。
Behav Res Methods. 2025 Aug 11;57(9):252. doi: 10.3758/s13428-025-02779-z.
2
Forgetting phenomena in the Iowa Gambling Task: a new computational model among diverse participants.爱荷华赌博任务中的遗忘现象:不同参与者中的一种新计算模型。
Front Psychol. 2025 Jun 5;16:1510151. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1510151. eCollection 2025.
3
Do Human Reinforcement Learning Models Account for Key Experimental Choice Patterns in the Iowa Gambling Task?
人类强化学习模型是否考虑了爱荷华赌博任务中的关键实验选择模式?
Comput Brain Behav. 2025;8(2):286-320. doi: 10.1007/s42113-024-00228-2. Epub 2024 Nov 7.
4
Decision-making and performance in the Iowa Gambling Task: recent ERP findings and clinical implications.爱荷华赌博任务中的决策与表现:近期事件相关电位研究结果及临床意义
Front Psychol. 2025 Mar 19;16:1492471. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1492471. eCollection 2025.
5
An introduction to Sequential Monte Carlo for Bayesian inference and model comparison-with examples for psychology and behavioral science.贝叶斯推理与模型比较中的序贯蒙特卡罗方法介绍——以心理学和行为科学为例
Behav Res Methods. 2025 Mar 26;57(5):125. doi: 10.3758/s13428-025-02642-1.
6
Neuromodulation of risk and reward processing during decision making in individuals with general anxiety disorder (GAD).广泛性焦虑症(GAD)患者决策过程中风险与奖赏处理的神经调节
Sci Rep. 2025 Jan 2;15(1):371. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-84520-y.
7
Humans forage for reward in reinforcement learning tasks.人类在强化学习任务中寻求奖励。
bioRxiv. 2025 Mar 7:2024.07.08.602539. doi: 10.1101/2024.07.08.602539.
8
Modulation of dlPFC function and decision-making capacity by repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in methamphetamine use disorder.重复经颅磁刺激对甲基苯丙胺使用障碍者 dlPFC 功能和决策能力的调节。
Transl Psychiatry. 2024 Jul 8;14(1):280. doi: 10.1038/s41398-024-03000-z.
9
Test-retest reliability of the play-or-pass version of the Iowa Gambling Task.玩或不玩版本的爱荷华赌博任务的重测信度。
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2024 Aug;24(4):740-754. doi: 10.3758/s13415-024-01197-6. Epub 2024 Jun 7.
10
Decision-making deficits in obsessive-compulsive disorder are associated with abnormality of recency and response consistency parameter in prospect valence learning model.强迫症中的决策缺陷与预期效价学习模型中的近因和反应一致性参数异常有关。
Front Psychiatry. 2023 Sep 29;14:1227057. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1227057. eCollection 2023.